Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR2003Guj317; (2003)3GLR2276
ORDERR.M. Doshit, J.1. Draft amendment is allowed. The amendment shall be carried out forthwith.2. The petitioner before this Court claims to be the Organization of self-employed workers (hereinafter referred to as 'the organization'). At the time of the hearing of the petition on 1st May, 2003, Mr. Pahwa had submitted the above referred amendment. Along with the amendment is the list of persons who, according to the petitioner, are the members of the Organization. It is the claim that the members of the Organization are shall business people who run their business from small stalls placed on the public roads of the city of Bhavnagar. A long time dispute as to the right of the said members to carry on business on the public roads is pending before this Court. Earlier, the Organization had filed Special Civil Application No. 4838/1982 for the benefit of the members and some individuals also preferred Special Civil Application No. 5485/1982. The said petitions were amicably settled. Unde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2003)2GLR1141
J.N. Bhatt, Actg. C.J. 1. A question, referred to the Larger Bench, to decide the constitutional question, by the learned single Judge (Coram ; A. D. Desai, J.) on 24-3-1977, would show that what it required to be decided by us almost after more than a quarter of century, is travesty of justice in a service matter on hand. 2. The learned single Judge has referred the question of constitutionality of the provisions of Section 52 of the Gujarat Agricultural University Act, 1969, ('Act' for short). 3. The Division Bench of this Court (Coram : S.H. Sheth and S.B. Majmudar, JJ. as they then were), in a decision rendered on 9-7-1980, in Bhudarbhai Hirabhai Patel v. State of Gujarat, 1980 (2) GLR 434, has upheld the validity and constitutionality of the provisions of Section 52 of the Act. It has been held that the provisions of Section 52 of the Act are not violative of Arts. 14 and 16. It is further observed in the said decision, that the legislature has, in the Act, treated and characteriz...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2004ACJ495; (2003)3GLR2258
M.S. Shah, J.1. The present appeal and cross-objections are directed against the judgment and award dated 8-10-1984 rendered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Junagadh in M.A.C.P. No. 330 of 1982 whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 4,55,000/- to the claimants as compensation for death of Dr. Prabhudas Patel, son of original-claimant Nos. 1 and 2, husband of claimant No. 3 and father of minor claimant Nos. 4 and 5. The said death took place on account of the injuries caused by an accident involving a bus owned by Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation and run by its driver Kara Laxman and an auto-rickshaw owned by original opponent No. 5-Gulammohmedkhan Abdulkhan and driven by original opponent No. 4-Ashwinkumar Vasantrai Joshi. The Tribunal held that the aforesaid four opponents were jointly and severally liable to pay the aforesaid award amount with running interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till realisation with proportionate costs there...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2003CriLJ4261; (2003)3GLR2152
D.P. Buch, J.1. This Criminal Revision Application has been filed by Central Bureau of Investigation against the respondent-original accused under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (for short 'the Code') for challenging an order dated 30th April, 1999, recorded by the learned Special Judge i.e. the Additional City Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad City, in Special Case No. 74 of 1989. It seems that the said case was instituted against the accused who is the contesting-respondent in this revision application for offences punishable under Section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, read with Sections 120B, 161 of the Indian Penal Code. The special case was registered in 1989 and till 1998 the matter had not proceeded further and evidence was not recorded. Therefore, the accused had submitted application at Exh. 39 on 30-11-1998 stating that since 1991 no evidence has been recorded and witnesses have not been kept present, the Court should conside...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2003)4GLR864
1. The appellants above named have preferred these two Criminal Appeals under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment and conviction order dated 21st October, 1999, in Special Case No.169/94 under which the learned trial Judge convicted the two appellants for an offence punishable under Section 17 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as `the said Act'), and sentenced them to suffer R.I for 10 years. The appellants were also directed to pay fine of Rs.2/- lacs and in default of payment of fine they were required to undergo further imprisonment for three years. The trial Court has also convicted the two appellants for an offence punishable under Section 195 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to suffer R.I. for 10 years. The trial court also directed that the substantive sentence be run concurrently.2. The prosecution case against the appellants before the trial court may be briefly stated as foll...
Tag this Judgment!