Gujarat Court February 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.
State of Gujarat,for and on Behalf of S a Patel,food Inspector. Vs. Bh ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-02-2011
1. The State has preferred this appeal under sec. 377 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for enhancement of the sentence imposed upon the respondents by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Himmatnagar vide order date 20.3.2010 passed in Criminal Case No. 650 of 2006, whereby, the learned Judge has convicted the respondents for the offence under sec. 7(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and imposed the punishment to be in the Court till rising of the Court and also imposed a fine of Rs. 1000/-each, in default, to undergo S/I for seven days, which is impugned in this appeal.2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:3. It is the case of the prosecution that on 24.8.2005 the Food Inspector has visited the shop of respondents-accused, and has taken the sample of coconut biscuits. Thereafter, he purchased the same and paid the price, cash memo was taken and after following the necessary procedure, the sample was sent to the Public Analyst, Vadodara for analysis and...
Valibhai Mohmadbhai Bagas. Vs. Police Sub Inspector P.P. Kanani and or ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-02-2011
1. The appellant-original complainant has preferred the present appeal under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the Judgment and Order of acquittal dated 07^th September 1999 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jambusar, in Criminal Case No.970 of 1987, by which the learned Magistrate was pleased to acquit the opponent Nos.1 and 2-original accused from the charges levelled against them.2. The short facts of the complainant is that on 13^th April 1987 at about 08:00 hours the present appellant-original complainant along with his cousin, against whom complaint was lodged in the Jambusar Police Station, went to Jambusar Police Station to stand as a surety of his cousin. It is the case of the complainant-present appellant that the opponent No.1-original accused No.1 came in the police station at about 10:00 hours and started misbehaving with his cousin and also severely beat his cousin in present of the complainant-present appellant and therea...
Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Ltd Through Deputy Engineer . Vs. Khemchan ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-02-2011
1. The short question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether a time barred appeal can be filed and is maintainable without an application and affidavit for condoning the delay?2. This First Appeal has been filed under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code challenging the judgment and decree dated 31st March, 2008 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Khambhalia dismissing Special Civil Suit no. 20 of 1997 filed by the appellant-plaintiff. The appeal has been filed on 16th May, 2009 whereas the limitation for filing the appeal had expired earlier on 30th August, 2008. The appeal was not accompanied by any application or affidavit for condoning the delay. However, Rule was issued to the respondents on 18th November, 2010.3. We have heard Ms. Maya Desai, learned counsel holding the brief of Mr. M.D.Pandya, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. B.P.Munshi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. The learned counsel for the appellant has prayed for ...
Amrutben Ranchhodbhai D/O Jivabhai Dhanabhai Dalwadi. Vs. State of Guj ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-02-2011
1. The matter relates to cancellation of mutation already made in the year 1999 in favour of the respondents. After long delay, the appellant-petitioner preferred revision application before the revision authority, which affirmed the appellate order. The learned Single Judge having refused to interfere with the same, the present appeal has been preferred.2. The dispute relates to the land bearing Khata No.188 and Survey Nos.199 and 201 situated at Moje Botad, District Bhavnagar. Mutation entry No.5874 was entered into the record of rights on 29.11.1994. After long delay, the petition for connation of delay in Appeal No.1/06-07 was preferred before the Dy. Collector, Palitana which having not entertained, the revision application was preferred which confirmed the order.3. It will be evident that the petitioner has also instituted Regular Civil Suit No.140 of 2005 for a declaration that the petitioner was entitled to 1/8^th share of the property in question which suit is pending.4. We ha...
State of Gujarat, Thro' B. R. Choksi, Sr. Drugs Inspector. vs. Nitin S ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-02-2011
1. This petition has been filed by the State challenging the judgment and order dated 12.5.2008 passed by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad in Criminal Case No.368/96. The case pertains to offence punishable under the provisions of Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1940 allegedly committed by the respondents herein. During the course of trial, the respondents filed an application dated 13.3.08 and stated that the trial is in progress, and five witnesses have been examined. The accused also stated several reasons due to which according to them, punishment below the minimum prescribed under the relevant provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act was required to be imposed in their case.2. It appears that the State opposed this application. No order was passed on the said application of the accused. Once again on 3.4.08, they moved a fresh pursis and stated that the offences are of technical nature and the case is pending since 12 years resulting into great mental agony to them. T...
Rayajibhai Dhulabhai. Vs. the State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-02-2011
1. RULE.2. Mr. R.C.Kodekar, learned APP appears and waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the Respondent State of Gujarat.3. Having regard to the facts of the case, the application is taken up for hearing today.4. The applicant convict prisoner, who, vide judgment and order dated 8.6.2006 rendered in Sessions Case No. 10 of 2005 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Godhra, has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 etc. of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life, has filed this application through jail authority, praying to enlarge him on temporary bail for a period of 30 days to enable him to attend marriage ceremony of his daughter, which is scheduled on 7.2.2011.5. We have considered the submissions advanced by Mr.R.C.Kodekar, learned APP for the Respondent State of Gujarat and perused the averments made in the application so also the jail remark sheet forwarded by the jail authority along with the application.6. Upon perusal of...
Hemraj Flour Mills and ors. Vs. Rajendra Chinubhai - Partner of Rajend ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-02-2011
1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is filed with a prayer to issue writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the judgment and order dated 18.11.2010 below Exh.31 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Negotiable Instrument Act, Court No.8, Ahmedabad and confirmed by the learned Sessions Judge in Criminal Revision Application No.517 of 2010 vide order dated 10.12.2010.2. The endeavour on the part of the learned advocate for the petitioner, at the outset for issuance of writ of mandamus against the orders passed by the courts below is not tenable. However, the application filed by the accused for production of documents related to chief examination on affidavit produced by the complainant at Exh. 10 came to be rejected on the ground that the chief examination on affidavit of the complainant filed by the complainant on 19.10.2005 and his cross examination is finish...
Baloch Hamidkhan Sorabkhan. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-02-2011
1. Amendment is allowed. Applicant to carry out amendment as per the draft amendment during the course of the day.2. Rule. Mr. LB Dabhi, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent State of Gujarat.3. Having regard to the facts of the case, the application is taken up for hearing today.4. The applicant convict prisoner, who, by judgment and order dated 20.3.2006 rendered in Sessions Case No.43 of 2004 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Patan has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced imprisonment of life, has filed this application praying to enlarge him on temporary bail for a period of three months, to enable him to get the treatment of the doctor of his own choice for the various ailments suffered by him.5. Having heard Mr. MR Prajapati, learned advocate for the applicant and Mr. LB Dabhi, learned APP for the respondent State of Gujarat and upon ...
Comm. Central Excise and Customs Surat-ii. Vs. Pradeep Tarachand Sharm ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-02-2011
1. Leave to add the substantial question of law as proposed vide amendment dated 27.10.2010.2. In this appeal under section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (the Act), the appellant-revenue has challenged order dated 1^st June, 2009, made by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad (the Tribunal) proposing the following questions:"(a) Whether the deemed export made by the Notice to other 100% EOUs in the country in terms of para 9.20 of Exim policy 1997-2002 were to be considered for the purpose of para 9.9(a), 9.9(b) and 9.20 of Exim policy 1997-2002 after taking consideration the definition of "Export" as described under Section 2(18) of Customs Act, 1962 as the term "Export" is neither defined in Exim Policy 1997-2002 nor in Central Excise Act, 1944.(b) If the Deemed Export cannot be treated as "Export" in terms of Notification No.2/95 CE dated 04.01.95 then, can M/s.Sanju Silk Mills be permitted to clear goods in DTA against the Deemed Ex...
Jamilaben Widow of Ibrahimbhaivohra(Bhanej). Vs. Sulemanbhai Idubhai M ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-02-2011
1. Present revision application has been filed by the petitioner-original plaintiff landlord for the prayer that the judgment and order passed by the lower appellate Court in Civil Appeal No.5 of 1996 dated 15.02.1997 (Annexure-C) may be set aside and also the further prayer regarding possession on the ground of default payment of rent.2. Learned advocate Mr.Mansuri for the petitioner submitted that Regular Civil Suit No.45 of 1988 was filed by the petitioner-plaintiff for the possession on the ground of arrears of rent, however, pending the suit, a compromise was arrived at between the petitioner-landlord and the respondent-tenant as per compromise pursis, recorded at Exh.203. He referred to the order passed by the Court below Exh.14 in Darkhast and also the decree passed at Exh.204 on the basis of compromise pursis at Exh.203. He submitted that as stated and recorded it was agreed and accepted that arrears of rent for a period from 1.3.1986 to 31.12.1993 was to be paid on or before 3...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »