Gujarat Court August 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.
Rohit S. Mankad Vs. Bank of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-31-2004
Reported in: (2005)ILLJ997Guj
K.S. Jhaveri, J.1.1 Both the above petitions were filed by the same petitioner and as the subject matter of both the petitions is interconnected they are heard and decided by way of this common judgement. In Special Civil Application No.3693/98 the petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of orders dated 7th December 1996 passed by the second respondent and the order in appeal dated 29th January 1998 passed by the Executive Director, the Appellate Authority of the respondent Bank, imposing a major penalty of compulsory retirement and to direct the respondent Bank to reinstate the petitioner on his original post and to grant him all consequential benefits.1.2 In Special Civil Application No.3694/1998 the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to pay full backwages to the petitioner from 11th January 1994 till 7th December 1996 as his suspension order can be said to have lapsed on termination of criminal proceedings. In the alternative it is prayed for a decl...
Deepakbhai J. Shah Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-31-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Guj115; (2005)1GLR373
M.R. Shah, J.1. As common question of law arises in all these matters, these Special Civil Applications are disposed of by this common judgment and order.2. The common question of law arises in all the aforesaid Special Civil Applications is with regard to interpretation of Section 20 of the Gujarat Town Planning & Urban Development Act, 1976 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'] and also with regard to lapse of reservation under Section 20 of the Act.3. Special Civil Application No. 17409 of 2003 is with regard to land bearing Survey No. 642, 643/1 and 654 situate at Village Kapurai, Taluka/District-Vadodara and the land is reserved under the Town Planning Scheme for Gujarat Housing Board [hereinafter referred to as 'GHB'].3.1. Special Civil Application No. 17410 of 2003 is with respect to land bearing Survey No. 333/2 situate at Village Tandalja and the said land in question is reserved under the Town Planning Scheme for Gujarat Slum Clearance Board [hereinafter referred to as 'GSCB...
Kantaben Chandulal Shah Vs. Gajiben Wd/O Umedji Abhrajji
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-27-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Guj49
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.1. The matter was listed from time to time and it was kept for final disposal on admission board at the request of the learned advocates as both the learned advocates are of the opinion that merely admitting the matter may not serve the ends of justice.2. ADMIT. Mr.Shalin N. Mehta, the learned advocate for respondents no.6 and 7 waives service of process of admission. In view of the fact that respondents no.6 and 7 are the really contesting parties service of notice of admission to other respondents is waived.3. The facts of the case are: the appellant-original plaintiff claims that she has purchased the land in question by a registered sale deed on 25.07.2002. As against that the claim of defendant no.7, Gayatrikrupa Sarkari Karmachari Cooperative Housing Society Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the society') is that, the society has purchased the same land by a registered sale deed dated 16.07.1999, which is executed in its favour by defendant no.6, who claims...
J.A. Desai Vs. Gujarat Housing Board
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-26-2004
Reported in: [2005(105)FLR359]
K.S. Jhaveri, J.1. The petitioners by way of this petition have challenged the arbitrary action on the part of the respondent Board in fixing the cut-off date for the benefit of pension.2.0. The short facts as they emerge from the record of the petition are that the petitioners at the relevant point of time were working with the respondent Board. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent Board by Resolution dated 13th July, 1992 introduced a pension scheme alongwith certain regulations, whereby as per regulation 2 (i) benefit of grant of pension is made applicable to only those employees who have joined services after 1st April, 1990, while as per regulation 2 (ii), grant of pension is made applicable to those employees who are existing i.e. who are in service as on 1st April, 1990. 2.1. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent Board has not made provision for grant of pension for the employees who retired prior to 1st April, 1990. It the case of the petitioner...
Gandabhai Dalpatbhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: (2005)2GLR1370
M.R. Shah, J.1. In this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the judgment and order dated 17th January 2004/21st February 2004 passed by the Secretary (Appeals), REvenue Department, Government of GUjarat, in Revision Application No. 44 of 2003 partly allowing the same and quashing and setting aside the order passed by the Collector, Surat, dated 9th April 2003 as well as teh order passed by Deputy Collector, Choryasi Prant, Surat dated 6th July 2002 and confirmign the order passed by the Mamlatdar, Choryasi Prant dated 11.6.2001 in respect to the revenue entry No. 4892 dated 15th February 2001 and further passing an order to make necessary entry with regard to injunction granted by Civil Court in Regular Civil Suit No. 156 of 2001 and the entry would be subject to the ultimate outcome of the suit pending between the parties.2. The petitioner, Gandabhai Dalpatbhai Patel was owner of land bearing Survey No....
Ramanlal Dalpatram Lokhandwala Vs. Surat Municipal Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Guj114
Jayant Patel, J.1. The applicant has preferred this application for review and/or clarification and/or modification of the order passed by this court on 4-8/7/2002 in SCA No.5165/01 and the petitioner has prayed for further direction to the respondent to pay the interest on the amount of compensation which has been paid to the applicant in pursuance of the order, dated 4-8/7/02.2. Heard Mr.Sanjanwala for the applicant and Mr.Desai for the opponent. Mr.Sanjanwala for the applicant submitted that the applicant would be entitled to interest on the compensation which is paid in pursuance of the earlier order and judgment of this court. He submitted that even if there are no express provisions for payment of interest on the basis of principles of equity the applicant would be entitled to interest over the principal amount of compensation as the possession is taken over earlier and the delay is caused in payment of compensation, as per the decision of the Apex Court in the matter of Satinder...
Sakarben Alias Lilaben Vasantbhai Battise and anr. Vs. State of Gujara ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: [2005(105)FLR131]; (2005)1GLR325
R.M. Doshit, J.1. Heard the learned advocates.2. The petitioners before this Court are the parents of late Shri Mahendrabhai Vasantbhai Battise. The said Mahendrabhai Battise was appointed as Unarmed Police Constable under the District Superintendent of Police, Bharuch in the year 1996. The said Mahendrabhai Battise died on 19th August, 2001. The petitioners have claimed that the late Shri Mahendrabhai Battise had made nomination in favour of the petitioners and that they being the parents of late Mahendrabhai Battise, are entitled to receive the terminal benefits payable on the death of the said Mahendrabhai Battise. The respondent No.6 is the widow of the said Mahendrabhai Battise. She had married to the said Mahendrabhai Battise on 6th May, 2000.3. On 1st February, 2002 this Court (Coram: P.B.Majmudar, J.) directed notice to issue to the respondents. It was further directed that, '...In the mean while, the amount in question may not be disbursed in favour of any one, if not disburse...
Jayantibhai Javabhai Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: (2005)2GLR1674
J.M. Panchal, J.1. Instant appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is directed against judgment dated August 27, 1996, rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad city, in Sessions Case No. 96 of 1995, by which the appellant is convicted of the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307 as well as Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for life and fine of Rs.2000/-, in default, R.I. for six months for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. and R.I. for five years for commission of offence punishable under Section 307 I.P.C. as well as R.I. for seven years for commission of offence punishable under Section 304 I.P.C. It may be stated that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has directed that substantive sentences imposed on the appellant shall run concurrently.2. Shantaben Hirabhai, who is complainant in the case, is resident of village Shihi, Taluka : Sidhpur, District:Mehsana. Name of ...
Nirmala J. Jhala Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: (2004)3GLR2142
Akil Kureshi, J.1. The petitioner who was a judicial officer has by way of the present petition challenged the notification dated 11.12.98 issued by the Government of Gujarat, by which the petitioner has been ordered to be compulsorily retired from service with effect from the date of the notification.2. Brief facts leading to the present petition can be noted at the outset. The petitioner was working as second Joint Civil Judge (SD), Ahmedabad Rural from 10.6.91 to 18.10.92. With effect from 19.10.92, the petitioner was posted as Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad Rural and continued to work on the said post till 25.11.93. For having committed certain misconduct, pending departmental proceedings, the petitioner was placed under suspension by order dated 21.1.94. On 6.8.94, a chargesheet came to be issued against the petitioner containing in all 12 charges against her. Shri M.C.Patel, the then Additional Principal Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad was appointed as the I...
Ayesaben Nur Mohammad Vs. Competent Authority
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: (2005)2GLR1082
K.A. Puj, J.1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order passed by the Competent Authority under Sections 7 & 9 of the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 (for short 'SAFEMA Act') dated 26.11.1999 forfeiting the properties of the petitioner and the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal dated 20.07.2001 confirming the order of the Competent Authority. The petitioner has also challenged the order of detention passed against Shri Umer Haji Hasan Subhaniya (for short 'the detenue') dated 29.12.1988 on the ground that the said order of detention is not valid and/or already revoked and/or not executed and hence, the SAFEMA Act is not applicable to the petitioner.2. Civil Application No. 10727 of 2001 is filed by the petitioner praying for direction to the respondent No.1 i.e. Competent Authority to return back the possession of two vessels, namely, MSV Shahe Al Bukhari BDI 74 and MSV...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »