Gujarat Court May 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.
Bhanji Devshibhai Luhar Vs Bhanji Devshibhai Luhar
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-10-2011
1. Present Appeal under Clause-15 of the Letters Patent is directed against the order dated 17.11.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by present appellant against the order dated 27.3.2009 passed by the Revisional Authority in Revision Application No. 42 of 2005. By the said order dated 27.3.2009 the Revisional Authority confirmed the order dated 6.8.2001 passed by the Collector, Surendranagar in Appeal No. 68 of 1999, by which the Collector had confirmed the order dated 2.2.2000 passed by the Deputy Collector. By the impugned orders the sale and consequent transfer of land in question in favour of the appellant is held to be in breach of Section 54 of Saurashtra Gharkhed Tenancy Settlement and Agricultural Land Ordinance, 1949 ("Ordinance" for short) and the authority has directed in exercise of power under Section 75 of the Ordinance, to evict the appellant from the land in question. The petition against the said orders is also dismissed by the ...
Revandas Ranchhodbhai Rathod Vs Jyotiben Wd/O Rameshbhai Madhusudan Th ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-10-2011
1. The appellant original petitioner seeks to challenge the judgment and order dated 03.12.2009 passed by learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.13578 of 2008, whereby learned Single Judge rejected the writ petition, confirming order passed by Gujarat Revenue Tribunal dated 11.07.2006 in review.2. Brief facts relevant for the purpose of deciding this appeal can be summarize as under:- i.The dispute relates to a portion of land situated at Alarsa Ta.Borsad Dist. Anand, which was running in the names of heirs of Madhusudan Ratilal Thakar and Deviprasad Ratilal Thakar. The record reveals that vide entry No.8009 dated 19.03.1980, the name of Madhusudan Thakar was ordered to be deleted and the land in question thereafter stood in the name of Deviprasad Ratilal Thakar. The said entry was certified on 10.08.1980. The record reveals that vide entry No.8978 dated 24.05.1993, the name of Deviprasad Ratilal Thakar was deleted, in light of the statement of Deviprasad Ratilal Thakar t...
NitIn Shantilal Bhagat and 1 Vs State of Gujarat Through B R Choksi
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-10-2011
1. The present controversy relates to an important question `whether an intra-court appeal (Letters Patent Appeal) under clause 15 of the Letters Patent is maintainable against an order passed by a learned Single Judge of the same High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India while exercising such power in its criminal jurisdiction'.2. There being conflicting views of two Division Benches of this Court, and some ambiguity whether there can be separate civil and criminal jurisdiction with regard to the petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, cases were referred to Larger Bench for its decision.3. The facts giving rise to these appeals in brief are as follows: L.P.A. NO.335/2010: The State of Gujarat preferred a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, in Special Criminal Application No. 989 of 2009 before this Court against one Nitinbhai Shantilal Bhagat and another (appellants in Letters Patent Appeal No. 335 of 2001) challenging the judgement and order...
Round Forest Officer (Normal) and 1 Vs Gohil Khengarsinh Lalubha
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-10-2011
1. Heard learned AGP Mr.Sharma for petitioners and learned advocate Ms.Sudha Shukla for respondent No.1.2. Today, Civil Application No.5650/2011 is notified before this Court. But when this Civil Application is taken up for hearing, learned advocate Ms.Sudha Shukla appearing on behalf of respondent workman submitted that workman is prepared to forgo the claim of 20% back wages which has been awarded by Labour Court, Bhavnagar in his favour. Therefore, she gave consent to set aside direction of granting 20% back wages in favour of workman and requested that main matter may be taken up for hearing today and she is prepared to make submissions on behalf of workman.2.1 Learned AGP Mr.Sharma appearing on behalf of petitioners is also prepared to argue the matter. Therefore, this Court has taken up SCA No.784/2011 today for final hearing with consent of both learned advocates.3. Civil Application No.5650/2011 is filed by applicant original respondent with a prayer to direct original petition...
Amit Subhashbhai Punjabi Vs State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-09-2011
1. This application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with first information report registered at C.R.No.I-25 of 2010 with Nadiad Town police station for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 65 and 66 of the Information Technology Act filed on 25.1.2010. Section 467 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66 of the Information Technology Act came to be deleted on 6.3.2010.2. Mr. Hirday Buch, learned counsel for the applicant submits that, on earlier occasion, when the application for seeking bail was filed before this Court, it came to be rejected and the SLP filed against the said order also came to be dismissed by the Apex Court with an observation to renew the request of bail after a period of six months and the said six months period expired on 25^th April 2011. It is further submitted that, except the applicant and other two accused, all other co-accused have been enlarged on...
L H Mehta and 3 Vs Kandla Port Trust and 2
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-09-2011
1. The writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners challenging the resolution of Board of Trustees of Kandla Port Trust dated 7.7.2009 and the consequential circular dated 29.10.2009 whereby the transfer fee in respect of transfer of sale of leasehold rights of a particular plot is sought to be levied with effect from 1.1.2004. Further prayer has been made to declare that the transfer fee in respect of transaction of transfer of plots, the basis and criteria adopted for determining the transfer fee is artificial, unrealistic, arbitrary and very antithetic to the underlying purposes of levy of transfer fee.2. The first and the third petitioners are lessee, having leasehold rights on residential plot No.111, Sector-2 in the township of Gandhidham and plot No.A-119 of Kandla Port Trust in the area known as Bhaipratapnagar, Gandhidham respectively.2.1 The second petitioner is the Gandhidham Property Dealers' Association formed with an object to provide a platform to the grievances ...
Jashvantbhai Babubhai Parmar Vs the State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-09-2011
1. The appellant is the original accused. By impugned judgement and order dated 21.8.2004 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Anand in Special NDPS Case No. 7/2003, appellant was convicted for offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985(here-in-after referred to as "the NDPS Act"). He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 20,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he was ordered to undergo one year of imprisonment.2. From the judgement under consideration, it can be seen that the learned Judge believed that the appellant was carrying total of 1kg and 500grams of ganja without license on 24.6.2003. He was thus convicted for offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act.3. From the provision made under the NDPS Act, it can be seen that small quantity of ganja is prescribed as 1000 grams and commercial quantity is prescribed as 20 kgs. The appellant was thus found to be in ...
Rameshbhai Gangarambhai Patel Vs State of Gujarat.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-09-2011
1. Heard Mr.Tejas Satta, learned advocate for the applicant and Mr.Dabhi, learned APP for respondent State.2. This application seeking regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred by applicant in connection with the offence registered with Mehsana City Police Station being M.Case No.1 of 2011 for the offences punishable under sections 406, 420, 415, 416, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471, 474, 114 and 120(B) of Indian Penal Code.3. Mr.Satta, learned advocate for the applicant submitted that brother of the applicant viz. Babubhai Gangaram Patel was co-purchaser of the plot in question, along with the present applicant. He submitted that the notice under section 135(d) of the Bombay Land Revenue Code was also issued and thereafter the transaction took place. It is submitted that since subsequently prices of the land have escalated, the complaint has been preferred. He has also submitted that applicant is bona fide purchaser. He has also referred to the ...
G S R T C Vs Kishor B Shah
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-09-2011
1. Present Second Appeal is filed by the Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation appellant original defendant posing the substantial questions of law as follows:(1) Whether the Civil Court has jurisdiction to try the dispute between the employer and employee when the employee is a workman within the meaning of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947?(2) Whether the Appellate Court is wrong in setting aside the finding given under Order 2 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the trial Court?(3) Whether the Appellate Court has power to sit over the finding given by the departmental authority under the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure?(4) Whether the Appellate Court has power to set aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court in the facts and circumstances of the case under Order 41 of the C.P.C.?2. The short facts of the case briefly summarized are that the original plaintiff respondent herein filed Regular Civil Suit No. 147 of 1984 challenging the order of dismissal on vari...
Rameshkumar Chhotalal Shah Vs Patel Varanasibhai Shivram
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-09-2011
1. By way of present Revision Application, the applicant has inter alia prayed for quashing and setting aside the judgment and order dated 30^th September 2003 passed by the Joint District Judge, Banaskantha, confirming the judgment and order dated 29^th November 1995 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Deesa in Regular Civil Suit No.175 of 1989, whereby the trial Court had dismissed the suit filed by the applicant herein.2. It is the case of the applicant that the applicant-landlord, who is original appellant-plaintiff, filed Regular Civil Suit No.175 of 1989 for possession of the suit premises prescribed in paragraph 3 of the original plaint on the ground of arrears of rent and for amount of arrears and mesne profit against the respondent-tenant, who is original respondent-defendant in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Deesa, which ultimately came to be dismissed vide impugned judgment and decree. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the applicant pre...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »