Gujarat Court December 2006 Judgments
State of Gujarat Vs. Jaman Haji Mamad Jat and 3 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-28-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ1584; (2007)2GLR1165
R.P. Dholakia, J1. The appellants, original accused No. 1-Jaman Haji Mahmad Jat, original accused No. 3-Sachu Haji Ibrahim Jat, original accused No. 4-Osman Ali Mahmad Jat and original accused No. 5-Navaj Ali Jat of Sessions Case No. 85 of 1999(original accused Nos. 1 to 4 respectively of Sessions Case No. 1 of 2002), were tried along with other accused by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Bhuj-Kutch, for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 121, 121(A), 122, 123 and 124(A), 489-A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 25(d), 25(1)(AA), 25(1)(B)(C)(F) of Arms Act, Sections 4(b), 5 and 6 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, Section 3 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Sections 3 and 6 of Indian Passport Rules (Entry Into India), Section 13(2) of Foreigners Act amended Section 14 and Section 6(1-A) of Indian Wireless and Telegraphic Act.2. The accused Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5 were held guilty by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge and Fast Track ...
Tag this Judgment!Arvindbhai Dahyabhai Patel and anr. Vs. Krishnakant J. Shah
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-28-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Guj104
P.B. Majmudar, J.1. By filing this appeal from Order, the appellants have challenged the order passed by learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Baroda, below Exh.5 in Special Civil Suit No. 249/2003 by which the learned Judge has partly allowed interim injunction application filed by respondent original plaintiff by granting order of status-quo in connection with one of the disputed lands being Survey No. 384. 2. The respondent herein is the original plaintiff of aforesaid suit. Said suit has been filed by the plaintiff for specific performance of the suit agreement as well as for permanent injunction. It is the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff is doing building construction and land development business in the city of Baroda and that defendant No. 1 approached the plaintiff for the purpose of developing his land, which is described in paragraph 1 of the plaint. It is the case of the plaintiff that defendants have agreed to give development contract to the plaintiff for developing the lan...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Virambhai Ranchhodbhai (Chaudhari) ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-28-2006
Reported in: 2008ACJ1332; AIR2007Guj119
M.S. Shah, J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is directed against the judgment and award dated 19.07.2006 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Sabarkantha at Himatnagar in MACP No. 1477 of 1999 awarding compensation of Rs. 2,95,000/- with proportionate costs and interest to the husband and minor son aged 10 years of Tulsiben Virambhai, who died at the age of 30 years in a motor vehicle accident that took place between the scooter on which the deceased was a pillion rider and the luxury bus insured by the appellant insurance Company on June 28, 1999. 2. Mr. Hasmukh Thakker with Mr. Palak Thakker, learned advocate for the appellant insurance Company has challenged the award only on the question of quantum of compensation. He submitted that on the basis that the deceased was doing agriculture work and cattle feeding work, the claimants had filed claim petition for compensation of Rs. 4 lacs. According to claimant No. 1 husband of the deceased, the ...
Tag this Judgment!Jal Sampatti Parivar Cooperative Housing Society Vs. State of Gujarat ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-27-2006
Reported in: (2007)2GLR2310(GJ)
Jayant Patel, J.1. The short facts of the case are that the petitioner is a Cooperative Society of the employees of Gujarat State Narmada Water Resources Department. Its members are the employees working in the office of the Water Resources Department of the State Government. As per the petitioner, it had applied for allotment of the land for its members, to the District Collector and the State Government, bearing Final Plot No. 42, 51 and 142 of T.P. Scheme No. 12 of Village Adajan. However, the application of the petitioner was not granted. In the meantime, the order has been passed by the District Collector for allotment of the land admeasuring 3739 sq. mtrs., to respondent No. 3 Society bearing Final Plot No. 42 of T.P. Scheme No. 12 and, therefore, under these circumstances, the petitioners have preferred the present petition for the relief, inter alia, to declare the decision of the respondent authority of not to allot the land of Final Plot No. 42, 51 and 142 of T.P. Scheme No. ...
Tag this Judgment!Patel Shambhubhai Bhaichanddas Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-27-2006
Reported in: (2007)1GLR713
Akshay H. Mehta, J.1. This group of appeals arises from a common decisions rendered by the Assistant Judge, Mehsana, in Land Reference Cases No. 2131/1993, 2132/1993 and 2133/1993. The date of the judgment and award is 2nd September, 1998. The original applicants have preferred these appeals to challenge the decision of the Court regarding the quantum of compensation determined by it for the land under temporary occupation of the respondents.2. The appellants are the owners of agricultural lands [the land for short] situated on the outskirts of village Chalasan, Taluka Kadi, District Mehsana. As the land was required for drilling oil wells, the Project Manager, ONGC, Mehsana Project, submitted a proposal for temporary occupation of the land. Since it appeared to the appropriate Government that land was needed for public purpose, the said proposal was accepted by it and in pursuance thereof, it exercised powers under Section 35(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [hereinafter referred ...
Tag this Judgment!Mehul Kishorsinh Jadeja Vs. Amarjit Singh (i.A.S.) Appellate Authority ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-26-2006
Reported in: (2007)2GLR1780
D.N. Patel, J.1. Rule. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. K. L. Pandya waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 3. Learned Counsel Mr. Shalin Mehta waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent No. 2.This petition has been preferred against the order dated 19th May, 2006 passed by Authorisation Committee as well as against the order dated 21st July, 2006 passed by Appellate Authority, which are at Annexures 'E' and 'G' respectively to the memo of the petition.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present petitioner was examined by Muljibhai Patel Urological Hospital and report given by the doctor, to the effect that the petitioner requires kidney transplantation. The kidney of the petitioner was not working properly, and therefore, the petitioner had applied to get kidney from one Vijaykumar Dilipbhai Choksi, who out of love and affection towards the petitioner is ready to donate the kidney to the petitioner and for that ap...
Tag this Judgment!Ajay S. Patel, Engineers Contractors and Consultant Vs. State of Gujar ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-22-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Guj150
1. This is an application for review of the judgment and order dated 6-10-2005 in First Appeal No. 413 of 2000 by which this Court allowed the appeal of the State Government and the Executive Engineer and set aside the judgment and decree dated 30-10-1999 of the learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Bharuch in Special Civil Suit No. 253 of 1992 on the ground that the jurisdiction of the Civil Court was already excluded by the provisions of the Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Ordinance, 1991.2. The present petitioner is partnership firm of Engineers, Contractors and Consultants. The Executive Engineer, Roads and Buildings Division, Bharuch had invited tenders for the work of constructing an office-cum-laboratory building for Fishery Department at Bharuch and the tender submitted by the petitioner herein was accepted. As per the agreement between the petitioner and the Executive Engineer, the project of construction for Rs. 15,61,107/- was entrusted to the petitioner. ...
Tag this Judgment!Liberty Cinema A Patnership Firm Vs. the State of Gujarat thro' the Ch ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-19-2006
Reported in: (2007)3GLR2638
R.S. Garg, J.1. The plaintiff, a partnership firm, carrying on business of exhibiting cinematographic films and motion pictures, was regularly exhibiting films. On 11.2.76, vide Notification No. SFC/1075-76/guj-Studio/VC/F, issued by the Directorate of Information, Government of Gujarat, a film [entitled as 'Vir Champrajvalo'] was exempted from payment of entertainment duty subject to certain conditions. The condition No. 1 of the notification read as under:1. That the existing admission rates excluding the amount of entertainment duty should not be increased and that the existing rates of admission fee is reduced by the amount of exemption given. 2. Clear intention of the government was that the owner of the Auditorium/Talkies should not enhance the rates of admission and if that condition is maintained, the exemption from the entertainment duty would be available.3. The petitioner was exhibiting the film from 6th February, 1976 and continued to exhibit the film till 26.2.76. It is to...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Minor Vatsal Timirbhai Shah and 4 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-19-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ2750; (2007)1GLR890
Akil Kureshi, J.1. The appeals are admitted. Learned advocate Mr MTM Hakim waives notice of admission of the appeals for the claimants in each appeal. Since issues arising are primarily between the appellant-Insurance Company and the claimants, it is not necessary to hear the owner/driver of the offending vehicle. At the request of the learned advocates appearing for the parties, the appeals are taken up for final disposal today.2. These appeals have been filed by the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. challenging a common judgment and two separate awards dated 29.4.2006 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Vadodara in MAC Petition Nos.760 and 1878 of 1998.3. On 17.1.1998 while one Shri Timirbhai Shah, his wife Shilpaben Shah and minor son Vatsal were travelling in a maruti car going from Karjan to Vadodara, their car met with an accident. The car was hit by a matador bearing registration No. GJ-17-T 1393. The matador in question was insured by the appellant-Insurance Company....
Tag this Judgment!Dalpatbhai Jasraj Dalwadi and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-18-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Guj123
ORDERJayant Patel, J.1. The short facts of the case are that the father of the petitioners executed a document of usufructuary mortgage on 16-1-1951 for the land admeasuring 5 acres and 11 gunthas with one Nanji Magna Dalwadi and the land was mortgaged for 99 years for borrowing Rs. 6,000/-. The father of the petitioners expired on 22-7-1976. On 14-8-1976, the Gujarat Rural Debtor's Relief Act. 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') came into effect. The petitioner applied to the Debt Settlement Officer for relief under the Act and on 26-5-1978. the Debt Settlement Officer decided in favour of the petitioners by relieving the petitioners from debt. The appeal was preferred against the decision of the Debt Settlement Officer by respondent No. 3 and the said appeal came to be dismissed on 26-10-1979. The matter was further carried before this Court by respondent No. 3 by preferring SCA NO. 44 of 1980 and this Court (Coram C.V. Jani. J.) on 27-7-1990 passed the judgment, whereby it o...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »