Gujarat Court January 2011 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.
Vimal Cooperative Housing Society. Vs. Revender Father of St Joseph Ch ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent of the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and as there is broad consensus between the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties, under instructions from their respective clients that the impugned judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court be set aside and the matter be remanded to the learned trial Court for deciding the suit afresh in accordance with law on its own merits and the learned Judge may be directed to pronounce the judgment on all the issues, the present appeal is taken up for final hearing today.2. The present First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been preferred by the appellant-original plaintiff challenging the impugned judgment and decree passed by the learned Principal Senior Judge, Dahod dated 22-26/04/2010 in Special Civil Suit No. 11/2004 by which the learned Judge has decided issue nos. 1/A and 1/B only and with...
Saurashtra University. Vs. Natverlal Manishanker Thanki.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. The present Second Appeal has been filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code by the appellant-original defendant challenging the Judgment & Order dated 18.12.1987 passed by the Learned Assistant Judge, Porbandar in Regular Civil Appeal No.27 of 1986 as well as the Judgment & Order dated 31.03.1986 passed by the Learned Joint Civil Judge (JD), Porbandar, wherein following substantial question of law are raised :-"(1) Whether after giving show-cause notice and after giving the respondent opportunity of hearing by which he has filed the reply to the show-cause notice, any principle of natural justice is violated in passing the impugned order at Exh.40?"2. The facts of the case briefly stated are that the respondent-original plaintiff preferred Civil Suit No.12 of 1984 before the Learned Civil Judge (JD), Porbandar, which was decreed vide Judgment & Order dated 31.03.1986, by which, notification of the University was declared null and void. The applicant-original defendant pre...
Amreli Dist Panchayat and ors. Vs. Shri Jagdishbhai Purshottam Bhai Ni ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. The present Second Appeal has been filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code by the appellant-original defendant challenging the Judgment & Order dated 30.04.1983 passed by the Learned District Judge at Amreli in Regular Civil Appeal No.91 of 1981 confirming the Judgment & Decree dated 25.06.1981 passed by the Learned Civil Judge (SD), Amreli in Regular Civil Suit No.328/1977, wherein following substantial question of law are raised :-(a) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the court below committed substantial error of law as well as of facts in decreeing the suit of the respondent plaintiff for declaration and injunction that the order compulsorily retiring him from the service was illegal, null and void?(b) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the court below erred in holding that the respondent plaintiff was entitled to pay and allowances during the period from 30^th September 1977 to 10^th Separately, 1979?(c) Whether in the facts and ci...
idrish Gulam Mahmmad Qureshi. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. The present appeal arises against the order dated 1/9/2010 passed by the Ld. Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 7659/2010, whereby the Ld. Single Judge has dismissed the petition.2. We have heard Mr. Shalin Mehta, learned counsel appearing with Ms. Vidhi Bhatt for the appellant.3. The contention raised on behalf of the appellant is that earlier Special Civil Application No. 11051/2001 was not pressed with a view to make representation and, therefore, the said ground should not disentitle the petitioner to challenge the decision taken after the representation. It was also submitted that the Ld. Single Judge ought to have examined the merits of the matter as to whether the decision of the authority was legal or not. When we called upon the learned counsel appearing for the appellant to address us on the merits of the main Special Civil Application, it was contended that as per the Government Resolution dated 1/5/2007 representation was made to absorb the petitioner as perma...
Lakhan Karshan Pateliya (Vala). Vs.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. Rule. Mr.Ashish Desai, Learned APP, waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent-State.2. The applicant original accused No.4 has preferred the present application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to release him on bail in connection with F.I.R. being CR No.III-5112/2010 registered with Sutrapada Police Station for the offences under Sections 66(B), 65A,E, 116(2)(B), 81, 83, 98 and 99 of the Bombay Prohibition Act,1949.3. Learned Advocate Mr.Rahul Dave referred to the FIR and submitted that the applicant is said to have been involved in transporting liquor. He has further submitted that the case arising out of the offence is tri able by a Magistrate and the applicant has no antecedent, therefore, it is requested to allow the present application and release the applicant on bail.4. Learned A.P.P. Mr. Ashish Desai, resisted the application and submitted that the quantity of the liquor is large and other co-accused are yet to be arrested and the investiga...
Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation. Vs. Natubhai Kalabhai Chavda and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. The present acquittal Appeal has been filed by the appellant - Food Inspector, Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, under Section 378 Cr. P.C., against the Judgment and order dated 30.12.2009, rendered in Criminal Case No. 543 of 2009 by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.6, Ahmedbad. The said case was registered against the present respondent No.1 original accused for the offence under section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (for short "PFA Act") in the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad. The said Judgment of the trial Court has been challenged by the Food Inspector on the ground that the Judgment and order passed by learned Magistrate is against the law and evidence on record.2. According to the prosecution case, the complainant Food Inspector, along with his Peon, visited the shop of respondent No.1 - accused on 30.05.2008 at 11.00 A.M. and, in presence of panch, took sample of groundnut oil for the purpose of analysis. The panchnama was also...
Keshabhai Gangabhai. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. Rule. Mr. LB Dabhi, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent State of Gujarat.2. Having regard to the facts of the case, the application is taken up for hearing today.3. The applicant convict prisoner, who, by judgment and order dated 24.5.2006 rendered in Sessions Case No.28 of 2005 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.4, Kachchh - Gandhidham has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 etc. of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment of life, has filed this application through jail authority, praying to enlarge him on regular bail during pendency and final hearing of the main appeal or in the alternative, praying to pass appropriate order for expeditious hearing of the main appeal.4. Having heard Mr. LB Dabhi, learned APP for the respondent State of Gujarat and upon perusal of the averments made in the application so also the jail remark sheet, no case is made out for grant o...
Kantibhai Khushalbhai Patel. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is preferred by the petitioner with the following main prayer:"[A] Your Lordships be pleased to quash the criminal complaint being CR. No.I-002/2007 registered with Idar Police Station and the consequent proceedings of Criminal Case No.680 of 2008 pending in the Court of Ld. JMFC, Idar in exercise of inherent powers u/s.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure".2. Mr. JV Japee learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and complainant are relatives being uncle and nephew and allegations for which offences are registered are levelled in the backdrop of dispute about land in question.3. Now, the parties have entered into settlement and in view of the fact that the land which has come to the share of the petitioner is having electricity connection of North Gujarat Electricity Company Limited bearing No.AG188 in the name of respondent No.2, which was used for irrigating agricultural land by fetchin...
Kirtiben Someshwarbhai Dave. Vs. State of Gujarat.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. Rule. Mr.K.P.Rawal, learned Assistant Government Pleader, waives service of notice of Rule for respondents Nos.1 and 2. Though Respondent No.3 is served, none appears for him.2. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed with the following prayers:"A. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue an order, writ in the nature of mandamus and/or Certiorary or other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the impugned order of transferring the petitioner from Sojitra to Limdi and the decision of the respondent no.2 rejecting the representation of the petitioner, as illegal, unjust, arbitrary, non-application of mind and be pleased to quash and set aside the same and direct the respondent to continue the petitioner at Sojitra.B. Pending admission and final disposal of the petition be pleased to suspend further implementation and operation of the order of transfer from at Ann-A and the decision of the respondent no.2 at Annx-E/1 and direct the responden...
Razak Musha Gandhar, Thro' Hajraben Ibrahimbhai Gandhar. vs. State of ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
1. Having regard to the facts of the case, the application is taken up for hearing today.2. The applicant convict prisoner, who by judgment and order dated 15.05.2008 rendered in Sessions Case No.82 of 2005 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.1, Jamnagar at Khambhalia, has been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 302, 120-B, 143, 149 and 147 etc. of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to RI for life, has filed this application through his aunt, praying to enlarge him on temporary bail for a period of 4 weeks to enable him to attend the after death ceremony of his mother Hanifabibi, who has died on 24.12.2010.3. We have gone through the application and the supporting document i.e. death certificate of the mother of the applicant that form part of the application and have considered the submissions advanced by Mr. Aftabhusen Ansari, learned advocate for the applicant and Mr.L. B. Dabhi, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent State of Gujara...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »