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.
Geetaben Jigneshbhai Modi. Vs Life Insurance Corporation of India and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-05-2011
1. Present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 13.8.2010 passed by learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.705 of 2006 preferred by the appellant, original writ petitioner herein challenging the action of the respondent-Corporation in terminating her as an agent and forfeiting of commission due and payable to the appellant for all times to come. Learned Single Judge dismissed the petition confirming the order passed by respondent-Corporation terminating the agency of the appellant and also confirmed the order with regard to the forfeiture of commissions.2. Brief facts relevant for the purpose of deciding the present appeal can be summarized as under:2.1 The appellant original writ petitioner was working as an agent of the respondent-Corporation attached to CBO- 14/83Z Ahmedabad Divisional Office, Ahmedabad. The respondent is a Corporation duly constituted under the provisions of the Life Insurance Act, 1956. The appellant introduced a proposal on the li...
Sikanderkhan Sattarkhan Pathan Vs State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-05-2011
1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule.2. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that investigation is over and charge sheet is filed and co-accused are enlarged on bail. It is further submitted that Section 307 of the IPC was added after considering injuries etc. received by the injured but considering other attending circumstances, at this stage by imposing suitable conditions, the applicant may be enlarged on bail.3. Heard learned APP for the respondent State.4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record of the case and taking into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, role attributed to the accused and punishment prescribed for the alleged offences coupled with the facts that charge sheet is filed and co-accused are enlarged on bail, without discussing the evidence in detail, at this stage, I am inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail in connection with C.R.No.I-135/2010 of Kalol City Police Station for the offence...
Maheshkumar Ramniklal Shah Vs Life Insurance Corporation Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-04-2011
1. Both these appeals under Clause 15 of Letters Patent are preferred by the appellant (the original petitioner) challenging the order dated 15.12.2009 passed by learned Single Judge dismissing writ petitions summarily filed by the petitioner. In the above writ petitions, the petitioner had challenged the action of respondent (Life Insurance Corporation) to cancel/decline the policy without assigning any reason, after accepting premium for about 4 years. The petitioner had also prayed to direct the respondent LIC to continue the policy of the subject matter in these appeals with all consequential benefits.2. The above writ petitions were rejected on following grounds:(a) That Clause 16 of the Introduction of the Plan No.167 about revivals or reinstatement of lapsed policy and Clause 3 of Conditions and Privileges attached to the policy document conferred absolute discretion in favour of Insurance Company to revive or reinstate lapsed/dis-continued policies.(b) That subject matter of di...
Mahendraprasad Mansukhlal Joshi Vs State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-04-2011
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-46 of 2010 with Khanpur police station for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477A and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.2. It is submitted that the record is in the custody of the Court and considering the nature of allegations at the most what is attributed against the applicant is preparation of report of persons eligible to receive aid of the government and such report was prepared on the basis of information and record available and further nothing is attributed of receiving any benefit of the scheme of the government.3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations and role attributed to the applicant and now the charge sheet is filed, without discussing the evidence in detail, prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discreti...
Sanjeev C Bordia and 1 Vs Sunilkumar Mohansingh Bordia
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-04-2011
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 14/8/2008 rendered by Ld. Judge, City Civil Court No. 10, Ahmedabad [for short 'the City Court'] in Civil Misc. Application No. 63/2008, whereby the City Court allowed said application filed by the respondent herein under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [for short 'the Act'] and set aside the award dated 02/12/2007 rendered by the Ld. Sole Arbitrator. The original claimants, in the result, preferred this appeal. Thus, the appellants were original claimants and the respondent was original respondent in the said arbitration proceedings and, therefore, for the sake of convenience, the appellants and the respondent shall be hereinafter referred to as 'the claimants' and 'the respondent' respectively.2. Both the parties happened to be partners of a partnership firm, which carried on business in clothes in the name and style of M/s. Sultansingh Mohansingh. A dispute took place amongst the partners, resul...
Jigar Govindbhai Madam Vs State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-04-2011
1. This application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure [for short 'the Code'] in connection with first information report registered at C.R.No.I-91 of 2010 with Panchkoshi "B" Division police station, Dist: Jamnagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 325, 324, 504, 147, 148, 149, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.2. The case of the prosecution is that, when the complainant and his family members were present on their field, the applicant herein along with some other persons came there and took up a quarrel since the complainant and his family members objected the workers constructing a compound wall on the disputed land. That, there was a dispute about the land adjoining to the land held by the complainant; workers were stopped from construction and a scuffle took place between the parties and the applicant herein had got down from the car with a sword in his hand and inflicted deadly blows of sword on the victim and other family members of the ...
Surat District Cooperative Bank Limited. and 1 Vs State of Gujarat and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-04-2011
1. In these cases, while the petitioners have challenged the validity of the provisions of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Act, 2008 [hereinafter referred to as "the Amending Act, 2008"], sought for a declaration that Sections 67, 73, 73A, 74, 74D, 76, 81 and 81A of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Principal Act"] as amended by the Amending Act, 2008 are unconstitutional and invalid. Prayer has also been made to set aside the guidelines dated 10.7.2007 and 29.4.2008 issued by the Reserve Bank of India [hereinafter referred to as "the RBI"].2. When the matter was taken up on 10.8.2010, Mr SN Soparkar, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the RBI, informed that both the guidelines dated 10.7.2007 and 29.4.2008 issued by the RBI have been substituted by fresh guidelines dated 18.6.2008 and all the co-operative societies have been allowed to function as per their Bye-laws.3. An affidavit is also filed on behalf of the 1^s...
Vinod Bhagwandas Bhavsar and 5 Vs Shree Cinema, Thro.Chairman/Managing ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-04-2011
1. Heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of respective parties.2. This petition is preferred by six workmen having their dues against respondent No.1 quantified in Recovery Certificate which comes to Rs.2,31,995/- each and total amount comes to Rs.13,91,970/-. The name of six workmen are; Vinod Bhagwandas Bhavsar, Dalpasinh Sardarsinh Chauhan, Bhalabhai Atmaram Rathod, Bhanjibhai Narainsinh Rathod, Gangaram Radheshyam and Hamir Ratnaji Marwadi.3. In present petition, petitioners have prayed following prayer in para 5(A) :"5(A) That Your Lordships be pleased to issue an order, direction or writ in the nature of mandamus and/or any other writ, order or direction, directing the District Collector, respondent No.2 hereinabove to immediately take action to recover the amount of Rs.13,91,970/- as per the Recovery Certificate dated 21.01.2009 marked ANN.C to this petition, with 12% interest thereon and be further pleased to disclose before this Hon'ble Court the action taken on the Reco...
Vasant Dyeing and Printing Works and 3 Vs Asset Reconstruction Company ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-04-2011
1. Challenge in this appeal is directed against the decision of a learned Single Judge dated 30th June 2009, whereby writ petition preferred by the appellant-guarantor against notice issued by the respondents u/Sec.13(4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, (hereinafter referred to as `the SARFAESI Act') was not entertained, there being an alternative remedy of appeal.2. The case of the appellant - M/s. Vasant Dyeing and Printing Works (guarantor) is that Hem Vijay Dychem Private Limited (principal borrower) has taken loan from Punjab National Bank (hereinafter referred to as `the Bank') in the year 1995, whose account was declared as Non-Performing Asset (N.P.A.) on 31st March 1998. A sum of Rs.80,73,096/- was due to the Bank at that time, including interest. The Bank preferred an application u/Sec.19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as `the Debts ...
Hakjibhai Harsingbhai Bhabhor Vs State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-04-2011
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-46 of 2010 with Khanpur (Bakor) police station for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477A and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.2.It is submitted that even if the allegations against the applicant are taken to the farthest, it may be a case of negligence or dereliction of duty but would certainly not attract the offences mentioned hereinabove and even as per the report and affidavit filed by the Investigating Officer, what is attributed against the applicant is of rendering opinion on the report and papers submitted by the subordinate staff. No further involvement of accepting the amount surfaces on record.3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations and role attributed to the applicant and now the charge sheet is filed, without discussing the evidence in detail, prim...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »