Gujarat Court January 2008 Judgments
Dalpatsinh Gambhirsinh Barad Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-2008
Reported in: (2008)2GLR1301
A.M. Kapadia, J.1. Nine accused persons ('A-1' to 'A-9' for short) were charged and tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad City, in Sessions Case No. 97 of 1992 for the offences under Sections 302/34, 201/34 and 193/34 of the Indian Penal Code ('the IPC' for short) on the accusation that on 10.1.1989 A-1 had taken Navinchandra Dahyalal Dholakia on police remand in connection with an offence of theft and during the remand period, A-1 and other accused persons had interrogated the deceased and during the course of the interrogation, by sharing common intention to cause death of Navinchandra Dahyalal Dholakia, all the accused persons tortured him and inflicted multiple injuries with lathi (stick) and committed his murder (custodial death).1.1. At the end of the trial, A-1 was found guilty of the offences with which he was charged. Therefore, the trial Court, vide judgment and order dated 13.1.1998, convicted A-1 for the offences under Sections 302, 201 and 193 IPC and s...
Tag this Judgment!Vithalbhai D. Pandya Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and 2 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-30-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ1842
M.R. Shah, J.1. Criminal Misc. Application No. 15506 of 2007 is filed by the applicant-third party in Criminal Appeal No. 1324 of 2007 to condone delay of 188 days in preferring the criminal appeal under Section 34 of the POTA, 2002 against the final judgment and order passed by the Special Court (POTA) dated 25.06.2007 in POTA Case No. 10 of 2003.Criminal Misc. Application No. 535 of 2008 is filed by the very applicant-third party in Criminal Appeal No. 18 of 2008 to condone delay of 352 days in preferring the criminal appeal under Section 34 of the POTA, 2002 against the order dated 18.12.2006 passed by the Special Court (POTA) below Exh. 855 in POTA Case No. 10 of 2003.Criminal Misc. Application No. 534 of 2008 is also filed by the very applicant-third party in Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 2008 to condone delay of 254 days in preferring the criminal appeal under Section 34 of the POTA, 2002 against the order dated 26.03.2007 passed by the Special Court (POTA) below Exh. 898 in POTA Cas...
Tag this Judgment!Sun Star Future Wood Ltd. Through Bhanubhai G. Patel Vs. Authorised Of ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-29-2008
Reported in: AIR2008Guj79; 2008GLH(1)346; (2008)2GLR1659
Jayant Patel, J. 1. The petitioner has preferred the petition for appropriate writ to quash and set aside the auction dated 19.12.2007, and of accepting the bid of the petitioner and has prayed for declaration that the action of acceptance of the bid of the property as arbitrary or unreasonable. The petitioner has also prayed for permanently staying the operation of the further action pursuant to the auction dated 19.12.2007, and the acceptance of the offer of one of the bidder.2. Heard Mr. A.L. Shah with Mr. Puj learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Parmar learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2, Mr. Bhatt learned Counsel for respondent No. 3, Ms. Lodha learned Counsel for respondent No. 4, Mr. S.N. Shelat with Mr. Nagarkar learned Counsel for newly added party, who has been permitted to be joined pursuant to the order passed by this Court today in Civil Application No. 772 of 2008 being the offerer pursuant to the auction held by the Bank.3. It has been contended on behalf of t...
Tag this Judgment!Ahmedabad Jupiter Textile Mills Vs. Mamlatdar and 2 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-29-2008
Reported in: [2008(118)FLR285]; 2008GLH(1)352; (2008)2GLR1393
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Saurabh Mehta for Nanavati & Nanavati on behalf of the petitioner, learned AGP Ms. Kiran Pandey for respondent Nos. 1 and 3 and learned advocate Mr. Chari for respondent No. 2.2. In the present petition, the petitioner has made prayer in Para.9(A), (B), (C) and (D) which is quoted as under:A. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or directions quashing and setting aside the impugned recovery notice dated 29.5.06 issued by the respondent No. 2 - Mamlatdar, Alien Recovery, Ahmedabad, as well as communication dated 2.9.2006 to Deputy Labour Commissioner at Annexure-A to the petition as being illegal, arbitrary, without authority and without jurisdiction.B. Pending hearing and final disposal of the present petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant interim relief, staying implementation and execution of the impugned recovery notice date...
Tag this Judgment!Nareshchandra Ramprasad Raja President of Samagra Gujarat Vs. Gajendra ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-28-2008
Reported in: 2008GLH(1)305
Jayant Patel, J. 1. The short facts of the case relevant for the purpose of this petition is that it appears that one Gajendra Shukhlal Patel and 11 persons had filed Civil Misc. Application No. 120/04 in the Court of District Judge, Mehsana against the order dated 27.02.2003 passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner, whereby the Scheme was framed in Scheme Application No. 9/94. It may be recorded that initially, the matter was filed in the City Civil Court and thereafter, the Court came to the conclusion that it has no jurisdiction and thereafter, the another application was filed before the Court of District Judge at Mehasana. The learned District Judge assigned the matter to the Court of Additional district Judge and Presiding Officer of Fast Track Court No. 2 for conducting the said matter. In such proceedings, the petitioner herein submitted the application Ex.89 contending inter alia that the power for conducting the matter vest to the learned District Judge only and the Court of ...
Tag this Judgment!Veekee Developers Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat and 2 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-28-2008
Reported in: AIR2008Guj76; 2008GLH(1)369; (2008)2GLR1027
D.A. Mehta, J.1. This petition has been preferred praying for following reliefs:8. The petitioner therefore humbly prays that:A. Your Lordship may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ/order/ or direction in the form of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the Respondent No. 1 & 2, to grant Mining lease of land bearing survey No. 125/1, strictly following statutory provisions of the Mines and Minerals (R & D) Act 1957 for extracting Manganese from the land bearing survey No. 125/1 of Village Shivrajpur, Tal. Halol, Dist. Panchmahals.B. Your Lordship may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or a writ in the form and nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/order or direction directing the Respondent No. 1 & 2, to consider the application of the petitioners dated 4.10.1996 for the grant of Mining lease for the land bearing survey No. 125/1 of the Village Shivrajpur, Tal. Halol, Dist. Panchmahals as the petitioners are qualifying all the criteria's a...
Tag this Judgment!Hind Mosaic and Cement Works and anr. Vs. Shree Sahjanand Trading Corp ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-2008
Reported in: LC2008(1)402; 2008(37)PTC128(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. The appellants/original plaintiffs have filed this Appeal against the order and judgment dated 21.8.2007 of the learned Single Judge of this Court passed in Injunction Application in Civil Suit No. 1 of 2007 in its original jurisdiction, rejecting the Interim Application for injunction and consequently vacating the temporary injunction granted by the learned City Civil Judge, Ahmedabad in Regular Civil Suit prior to its transfer to this Court.2. The factual matrix giving rise to the present Appeal are that the appellant after intensive research, development and incurring huge expenses, invented the invention viz. 'Polyvinyl Chloride threaded pipe joint system with coupler and wire locking device comprising two pipe joining components, two sealing rings, including a wire lock, the said wire lock is component being inserted into the groove which locks the coupler with the one end of the pipe joint, the said coupler joining both the ends using the threads, the said threads ...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Gujarat Vs. Dinesh M.N. (S.P.)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-2008
Reported in: (2008)3GLR2173
Anant S. Dave, J.1. In this application, which is preferred by the State of Gujarat under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, learned Judge (Coram : D.H. Waghela, J.) vide order dated 29.10.2007 issued Rule making it returnable on 2nd November, 2007. On 18th December, 2007, when another cognate matter being Criminal Misc. Application No. 12646 of 2007 of co-accused was listed for hearing, order dated 12.12.2007 passed by the apex court in Contempt Petition (Cri.) No. 8 of 2007 in Writ Petition (Cri.) No. 6 of 2007 was brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Counsel appearing for the parties where reference was made to Criminal Misc. Application Nos. 12646 of 2007 and 12644 of 2007 pending before this Court, the hearing of which was fixed on 18th and 20th December, 2007 respectively. Accordingly, on 18th December, 2007, oral order came to be passed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 12646 of 2007 by this Court by directing the Registry to list both the abov...
Tag this Judgment!Medical Officer and anr. Vs. Naranbhai Dharmabhai Prajapati
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-2008
Reported in: 2008GLH(1)328; (2008)1GLR821
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Leave to amend to change the designation of petitioner No. 2 Chief District Health Officer, Gandhinagar District Panchayat, Gandhinagar.2. Heard learned Advocate Mr. HS Munshaw for the petitioners.3. Through this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are challenging ex parte award made by the labour Court, Kalol in Reference No. 435 of 1999 dated 29.1.2007 wherein the labour court has granted reinstatement with of the respondent workman on his original post with full back wages and costs of Rs. 1000.00. In the said reference, statement of claim was filed by the respondent on 18.1.2000. Date of termination as mentioned is 7th June, 1989. Date of joining is 1st June, 1988. In reference, the labour court had issued notice to the petitioner vide Exh. 3 which was served on the petitioner but no one had remained present on behalf of the petitioner before the labour court in response to the notice issued by the labour court and, thereafter,...
Tag this Judgment!Devkrushnadasji Guru Dharmadasji and 3 ors. Vs. the State of Gujarat a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-24-2008
Reported in: (2008)3GLR1981
Jayant Patel, J.1. The petitioners have preferred the petitioner for appropriate writ to quash and set aside the order dated 2.2.2007 passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Rajkot under Section 41A of the Bombay Public Trust Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') below Application No. 41/5/07. The petitioners have also prayed to issue appropriate writ of prohibition against the respondents from proceeding further upon the application filed by respondents No. 2, 3, and 4 under Section 41A of the Act.2. Heard Mr. S.B. Vakil and Mr. N.D. Nanavati, learned Sr. Counsel with Mr. Kinariwala, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Y.F. Mehta, learned Counsel for the Charity Commissioner, who is titled as State of Gujarat, Mr. P.M. Thakkar, learned Sr. Counsel for respondent No. 2, Mr. K.S. Nanavati, learned Sr. Counsel for respondent No. 3 and Mr. Yagnik, learned Counsel for respondent No. 4.3. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioners that the Charity Commissioner has no pow...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »