Gujarat Court March 2007 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.
Rhombic Laboratory and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-16-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ2517; (2008)1GLR80
C.K. Buch, J.1. Both the appellants are original accused of Criminal Case No. 3 of 1995 decided on 26th June, 1997, who have been held guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and for violation of paragraph 10 of the Drugs (Price Control) Order, 1987 and the appeal has been preferred under the provisions of Sections 374 read with Section 386 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. Mr.Mangukia, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants has taken me through the judgment under challenge as well as the various grounds of challenge mentioned in the memo of appeal. Mr.Mangukia, learned Counsel and Ms.Pandit, learned A.P.P., both have taken me through the documentary evidence as well as oral evidence referred too by the learned trial Judge while recording conviction and dealing with technical defence that were raised during the course of trial. 3. Of course, Mr.Mangukia, has argued at length on legal issues as well as on factual metrics, howeve...
Radhiben and ors. Vs. Surtan Vesta Damor and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-16-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Guj147
ORDERR.S. Garg, J.1. Mr. D.F. Amin, learned Counsel for the appellants, Mr. R.M. Vin, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 and Mr. Hukum Singh, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent No. 2-State.2. Short facts necessary for disposal of the present appeal are that one Chetiabhai Mavjibhai Katara-husband of the plaintiff No. 1 and father of the plaintiff Nos. 2 to 4 was the owner of the suit land bearing Survey No. 51 admeasuring 13 Acres and 2 Gunthas and was cultivating the same.3. The said Chetiabhai Mavjibhai Katara expired in the year 1951 and thereafter, the plaintiffs became owners of the suit land. The plaintiffs say that their names were recorded in the revenue records vide Mutation Entry No. 35. The defendant No. 1, who were residing at village Voroda, somehow or other, managed an entry in his favour that he had purchased the property by paying a consideration of Rs. 300.00 (Rupees Three Hundred only) and the sale was oral. After realising about the entry, ...
Mustakali Mahmedbhai Shaikh and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-15-2007
Reported in: 2008GLH(1)414; (2008)1GLR140
D.H. Waghela, J.1. Being aggrieved by the rejection of their application by order dated 15-2-2005 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana in Sessions Cases Nos. 77 and 78 of 2004, the petitioners, original witnesses and aggrieved parties, have approached this Court with a prayer to set aside that order and direct further investigation.2. The factual backdrop about which there is no controversy is that, on 28-2-2002, communal riots had spread to village Umta of Taluka Visnagar where the mob of about 1500 to 2000 persons had indulged in rioting and arson and the police was required to open fire. People belonging to one community had to flee or had to be rescued even as their homes and valuable goods worth lakhs of rupees were burnt, destroyed or damaged and two members of that community were alleged to have been killed. Pursuant to the complaint being C.R. No. 1-61 of 2002 dated 1-3-2002 registered at the instance of Assistant Sub-Inspector in Visnagar Police Station, investiga...
Rasiklla Dalpatram Thakkar Vs. the State of Gujarat and 2 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-15-2007
Reported in: (2007)3GLR1984
ORDERSAt this stage, learned Advocate for the petitioner requests to extend the interim relief for a further period of three weeks. Mr. Vakharia learned Advocate for respondent - Bank has strongly objected to the grant of such request. As has been observed by this Court in the earlier part of its judgment, this litigation is nothing but, only an attempt on the part of the petitioner to delay the proceedings and to deprive the respondent ' Bank of its legitimate dues and since the amount involved is public money, this Court does not find it fit to extend the interim relief as prayed for by the petitioner. Hence, the request is rejected....
Patel Prabhudas Hargovandas and ors. Vs. Heirs of Patel Babubhai Kachr ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-15-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Guj148
ORDERR.S. Garg, J.1. Mr. Tejas Barot, learned Counsel under the authority of Mr. M.C. Barot, learned Counsel for the appellants and Mr. R.C. Jani, learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1/1 to 1/5.2. Short facts necessary for disposal of the present matter are that one Shamaldas son of Parshottamdas on 19-2-1946 for a consideration of Rs. 300-00 (Rupees Three Hundred only) mortgaged his agricultural land of Survey No. 1051 admeasuring 1 Acre and 7 Gunthas in favour of the present appellants for a period of 15 years. Since the appellants (defendants) were minor at the time of execution of the deed, the mortgage was accepted by their mother namely Bai Amba Hargovandas. The said Shamaldas son of Parshottamdas had two sons Shankar Shamaldas and Mangal Shamaldas. During currency of the mortgage, the said Shankar Shamaldas and Mangal Shamaldas on 7-2-1954 executed a gift deed in favour of the respondent-plaintiff and on the strength of this document, the plaintiff submits that he has become...
State of Gujarat Vs. Zala Kanubhai Kantuji
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-14-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ2463
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.1. The State of Gujarat is before this Court being aggrieved by order dated 4-1-2007 passed below application, Exhibit 1 in Sessions Case No. 87 of 2006 by the learned Sessions Judge, Patan, whereby the learned Sessions Judge was pleased to dismise the application, Exh, 1 dated 9-11-2006 filed under See. 307 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') praying that he be tendered a pardon.Rule. Mr. Naik, learned advocate appearing for the respondent waives service of rule. The respondent has also approached this Court by filing Criminal Revision Application No. 27 of 2007 challenging the very same order wherein this Court issued rule on 25-1-2007 returnable on 28-2-2007,2. When the matter came up for consideration the learned APP prayed for time on the ground that he has received Instructions to challenge the order impugned. The matter was adjourned from time to time. The State has filed the present Criminal Revision Application,3. Brief...
Navinchandra K. Shroff and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-14-2007
Reported in: (2007)3GLR2290
R.S. Garg, J.1. Mrs. Ketty A. Mehta, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Hukum Singh, learned Counsel for the respondents - State.2. By this petition, the petitioners seek to challenge order dated 19-5-1995 passed by the Deputy Collector, Choryasi Prant, Surat in Case No. 42 of 1990 holding that the land was liable to be resumed by the State for its management under Section 65 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 ('Tenancy Act' for short).3. Undisputedly, the petitioners are owners of land of Survey No. 86 admeasuring 2.59 Hectares of Village Bhimpore, Taluka Choryasi, District Surat. They made an application to the authority for grant of permission to use the property for non-agricultural purpose. The said permission, commonly known as N.A. Permission, was accorded and granted in favour of the petitioners on 27-4-1992 by Surat Urban Development Authority ('S.U.D.A.' for short) and a resolution was also made by the Panchayat in favour of the petitioners.4. On ...
Kiritsinh D. Rathod Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-14-2007
Reported in: (2007)3GLR2173
D.N. Patel, J.1. Rule. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Nisha Parikh waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Learned Counsel Mr. R.M. Chhaya with Mr. Hriday Buch waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent No. 3.The present application has been preferred for quashing and setting aside the appointment of respondent No. 3 as Notary for Barvala Taluka as well as for getting direction upon Government to appoint the petitioner as a Notary for Barvala Taluka.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent authorities have not followed the procedure as laid down under the Notaries Act, 1952, and the Notaries Rules, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1952' and 'the Rules, 1956'). Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that there are criminal cases registered against respondent No. 3 and so he ought not to have been appointed as a Notary. There are also objections raised for appointment of respondent No. 3 as ...
Champaben W/O Chandrasinh Dhulabhai Rathod and 3 ors. Vs. Anopsinh Som ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-14-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ1551; (2007)2GLR1663
M.S. Shah, J.1. In this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the original claimants have prayed for enhancement of the compensation awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panchmahals at Godhra in MACP No. 495/1995 on account of the death of Chandrasinh Dhulabhai Rathod who died at the age of 45 years in motor vehicle accident between a Tractor-Trolley insured by respondent No. 3-United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Scooter being driven by the deceased. The petition was filed for compensation of Rs. 15,00,000/-. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 6,31,000/- with proportionate costs and interest. In this appeal, widow and three children of the deceased have prayed for additional compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/-.2. On 5th May, 1995, the deceased was driving his Scooter on a public road in the Panchmahals District when it was knocked down by the Tractor-Trolley insured by respondent No. 3 insurance company causing fatal injuries to the Scoote driver. The Tribuna...
Gujarat Ship Breakers' Association Vs. State of Gujarat and Anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-13-2007
Reported in: (2007)2GLR2150
R.S. Garg, J.1. Shri Y.H. Motiramani under the authority of Shri A.S. Vakil, learned Counsel for the petitioner; Shri L.R. Pujari, learned AGP for the respondents. Heard.2. By this petition, the petitioners are challenging the order dated 12.7.93 passed in Adm-work-6A-Case-43/93 by the Collector, Bhavnagar, directing confiscation of 665 filled LPG cylinders and order dated 3.8.95 passed by the Joint Secretary, Food & Civil Supplies Department, in Appeal Case No. 1093-2649-J/Appeal Application No. 451 of 1993, confirming the order passed by the Collector. 3. The petitioners claim themselves to be a Non Trading Corporation registered under the Bombay Non Trading Corporations Act, 1959. Making a submission that most of its members are engaged in ship breaking business and are in need of bulk quantity of LPG, they applied for supply of LPG. Central Government accepted the application and issued an order for supply of 1000 Metric Tonnes every quarter with a further condition that the Associ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »