Gujarat Court June 2004 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Bipinbhai S. Patel Vs. Post Master
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-30-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Guj360
P.B. Majmudar, J.1. The petitioners have approached this Court, as the postal authority has failed to issue National Savings Certificate for different amounts deposited by the petitioners with respondents No. 1 and 2.2. It is a matter of regret that the present petitioners are required to approach this Court, even though the amount in question is invested with the postal authority, which is a Government agency. The petitioners were under the impression that it is a safe investment and they will get necessary National Saving Certificates, as the amount is already accepted by the authorised agent of the postal authority. It is the case of the petitioners that the Government of India has formulated a policy for attracting savings through their authorised agents and the said scheme is known as 'Government of India National Saving Organisation'(sic). Under the scheme, the persons, who are desirous to deposit the amount with the Government, can do so under various schemes announced by the Go...
Jethabhai Mepabhai Makwana Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-30-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Guj132
A.R. Dave, J.1. The petitioner is a resident of Anjar and has been aggrieved by Town Planning Scheme No. 3 made by respondent no. 2. His residential house, which is on Survey No. 1237-original plot No. 82, would be adversely affected because the construction put up by him on approximately 20 sq meters of the said land will have to be demolished as a result of the scheme.2. The facts giving rise to the present petition, in a nutshell, are as under;2.1. Because of the earthquake, which had affected Gujarat, and more, particularly, Anjar, Bhuj, Rapar and other places in the western part of Gujarat on 26th January, 2001, respondent no. 2 had declared its intention to make a town planning scheme in respect of Anjar. The said declaration was made under the provisions of Section 41(1) of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on 4th May, 2002. In the instant case, the petitioner is concerned with Anjar Town Planning Scheme No. 3. The p...
Rafik Khan Asgarkhan Pathan Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-30-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ1284; (2005)1GLR913
R.P. Dholakia, J.1. The appellant-original accused has preferred this appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order dated 29-5-2000 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 7, Ahmedabad City, in Sessions Case No. 222 of 1999 whereby he has been sentenced to undergo ten years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default to undergo further rigorious imprisonment of one month for the offence punishable under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code. He has further been sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 342 of IP Code. He has also been sentenced to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 506(2) of IP Code with a token fine of Rs. 100/-in default to undergo further one month rigorous imprisonment. The three substantive sentences were ordered to be run concurrently.2. The case of the prosecution is that the victim was residing in Ramanla...
Prabhatbhai S. Desai Vs. Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-30-2004
Reported in: (2005)2GLR1266
Ravi R.Tripathi, J.1. This Appeal From Order is filed being aggrieved of an order passed below Notice of Motion in Civil Suit No.1521 of 2004 dated 15.06.2004, whereby the learned Judge of the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad was pleased to dismiss the Notice of Motion.2. The learned advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that The Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as 'the new Act' for the sake of brevity) is applicable to the facts of the case that under the provisions of section 126 of the new Act, in the event of noticing an irregularity on inspection, the Ahmedabad Electricity Company (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent company') could have assessed the charges for a period of three months only and not for a period of six months; that the assessment could have been only 1.5 times, and not 2.5 times; that the appellant is served with an assessment order for a sum of Rs.54,287/-, and in addition to that the appellant is also directed to deposit a sum of Rs.5400...
Hashmikant M. Sheth Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-28-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD(Cri)3; I(2005)BC471; 2004CriLJ3628; (2005)1GLR638
A.M. Kapadia, J.1. In this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code' for short) the petitioner against whom Criminal Complaint bearing No. 558 of 2003 is filed in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ahmedabad (Rural) for commission of alleged offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act ('the Act' for short) in which process has been issued, has prayed to quash and set aside the complaint and process issued thereunder, on the grounds stated in the petition.2. The petitioner is the original accused whereas respondent No. 2 is the original complainant in the above referred criminal complaint. Therefore, for the sake of convenience and brevity, the petitioner is referred to as 'the accused' whereas respondent No. 2 is referred to as 'the complainant' hereinafter in this judgment.3. As per the averments made in the petition, the accused came in contact with the complainant and therefore as and when the accused was in need o...
Harijan Sevak Sangh Vs. Joint Charity Commissioner
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-28-2004
Reported in: (2005)1GLR224
Jayant Patel, J.1. Respondent No.3 deleted.2. Rule. Mr.H.D.Dave, Ld.AGP appears and waives service of rule on behalf of respondent No.1 & 4. Mr.Joshi appears and waives service of rule on behalf of respondent Nos 2 & 3. With the consent of learned advocates of both sides the matter is taken up for final hearing today.3. The present petitioner has approached this court challenging the legality and validity of the order, dated 24.9.2003 passed by the Jt.Charity Commissioner in Misc.Appln.No.24/98 whereby application under section 41A hasn been rejected and the interim protection granted earlier is vacated. The petitioner has also prayed for giving direction to the respondent No.1 to decide the Scheme Application Nos 18 & 19/98 preferred under section 20A of the Act and the Appeal No.6/98 pending before the respondent No.1 as early as possible.4. Upon hearing Mr.Kanabara for the petitioner, Mr.Joshi and Mr.Dave, Ld.AGP for respondents, it appears that there is interse dispute amongst the ...
Shyam Textile Mills Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-28-2004
Reported in: 2005(100)ECC524
M.S. Shah, J.1. Rule. Ms D.N Raval, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Central Government waives service of Rule for the respondents.In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petition is taken up for final disposal today.2. The petitioner-firm had applied for refund of an amount of Rs. 1,56,251/- which came to be rejected by the Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise, Division-VI, Ahmedabad by his order dated 1.9.1999 (Ann. A). The petitioner carried the matter in appeal and the Commissioner (Appeals) by his order dated 9.1.2003 (Ann. B) set aside the impugned order of the Deputy Commissioner and allowed the appeal after giving a finding in favour of the petitioner that the petitioner was entitled to get refund of the amount claimed. Of course, the department has gone in appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal but the department has not obtained any interim stay of operation of the said order of the Commissioner (Appeals). Under the circumstances, t...
Meghdoot Automobiles Vs. Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-25-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Guj359; (2004)3GLR494
D.N. Patel, J.1. Rule. Learned counsel for the respondent waives service of notice of Rule.2. The petitioner seeks a writ of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution to direct the respondent to accept 20% of the amount of the provisional assessment and to allow the petitioner to go before the appellate authority, under section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003.3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there is already a case booked against the petitioner by the respondent company. The provisional assessment has already been carried out in pursuance of section 126(1) and (2) of The Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as 'The Act of 2003'). It is also averred by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has ready deposited 1/3rd of the amount assessed by the respondent and therefore, the petitioner is entitled for reconnection of electricity connection and to go before the appellate authority as per section 127 of the Act of 2003....
Patel Scrap Traders Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-25-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Guj13
K.M. Mehta, J.1. Patel Scrap Traders, (a proprietorship concern), having its office at Balapir-ni-Dargha, Tal.Kadi, Dist.Meshana, petitioner has filed this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer that this Court may please to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other suitable writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the decision dated 7th November, 2003, and consequent sale agreement dated 15th March, 2004, entered into by and between the respondents.2. It may be noted that this petition was filed on 12th April, 2004, the Court issued notice, however the court did not grant interim relief in this matter because in earlier matter in Special Civil Application No. 3453 of 2004 which I have already disposed of the said matter by separate order and the interim relief was also granted and all the matters were heard together and therefore this Court did not grant interim relief in this matter.3. The facts giving rise to this petition...
Pushpaben Jitendrakumar Shah and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-25-2004
Reported in: II(2005)ACC185; 2005ACJ191; AIR2004Guj370; (2004)3GLR2206
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The appellants have challenged the judgement and decree dated 4th May 1984 passed by the learned Civil Judge (S.D.) - Navsari in Special Civil Suit No.28 of 1981 dismissing the suit in which they have prayed for damages to the tune of Rs.1,20,000=00 with interest for the death of Shri Jitendrakumar Somchand Shah, who while travelling by 15th Down Saurashtra express on 30th April 1979 from Maroli railway station to Ahmedabad, was thrown out from the railway compartment while the train was moving between Maroli and Sachin and died as a result of injuries resulting therefrom.2. According to the appellants-plaintiffs, Shri Jitendrakumar Somchand Shah was issued a ticket on 30th April 1979 by the railway for travelling from Maroli to Ahmedabad by 15 Down Saurashtra Express, and he entered the compartment on the basis of that ticket. According to the plaintiffs, the defendant No.1 was in the practice of issuing the tickets far in excess of the space and capacity of the...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »