Gujarat Court May 2012 Judgments
V.K. Dharia Vs. Tourism Corporation of India and Others
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-11-2012
COMMON CAV JUDGMENT As common questions of fact and law are involved in both the above captioned petitions, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. 1. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners, employees of respondent no.1 serving as Chokidar at one point of time, have prayed for the following reliefs : “16. (A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to admit and allow this petition. 2. YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, by directing the respondents, mainly respondent No.1, their officers, agents and servants to give to the petitioner the retirement benefits which are due and payable to him from the date of his original date of appointment, by calculating the same from the original date of appointment i.e. 1/5/1980 within a period of 15 days or as expeditiously as possible. 2. Pending admis...
Tag this Judgment!Patel Vipulkumar Ramjibhai Vs. Union of India Through Secretary and Ot ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-11-2012
CAV JUDGMENT J.B. PARDIWALA By way of this writ-petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, in the nature of a public interest litigation, the petitioner, a resident of Baroda, claiming to be a public spirited citizen of India and an activist, has prayed for the following reliefs:- "(A) Be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, directing Ministry of Environment and Forests, respondent no.1 herein to revoke Environmental Clearance accorded to M/s. Electrotherm (India) Ltd., respondent no.3 herein, for expansion of its steel plant at Survey No. 325, 326, 339, 344 and 350 / 1 / 2 / Paiki, Milestone No. 310, National Highway No.8-A, Village : Samakhiyali, Taluka : Bhachau, District : Kutch, with immediate effect, till (i) environmental norms, (ii) EIA Notification 1994/2006 and (iii) directions issued by this Hon'ble Court in its judgment order dated 09.12.2004 in Special Civil Application Nos. 14460/2004, 14813/2004 and 14819/2004 are strictly complied with by the s...
Tag this Judgment!Bhatia International Ltd. Vs. Gujarat Pollution Control Board Through ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-11-2012
CAV JUDGMENT J.B. PARDIWALA 1. The present Civil Application is at the instance of the original petitioner and by way of which seeks directions upon respondent no.1 GPCB to permit applicant to use its Gavier coal storage premises situated at survey no. 48/p, Hissa no.1,2,3, Village Gavier, Surat as “Transit Plot” for such period of time on such terms and conditions as may be directed by this Court. 2. The facts shortly stated be thus: 2.1 The applicant is engaged in the business of coal and claims to be one of the leading coal importers and a dealer of imported coal. It is his case that he is carrying on business all over the country which includes Surat. 2.2 It appears that as and when a consignment of coal is imported, it first reaches at the Port. The coal is thereafter lifted from the Port and is being stacked at Gavier coal storage facility, which is being used as a transit plot. According to the applicant, a transit plot is where the coal imported at the Port is lifte...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Pravinsinh H. Zala
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-11-2012
ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner-Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation has challenged the award dated 25th July, 2002 passed by the Labour Court, Surendranagar in Reference (LCS) No.147 of 1996 whereby the Labour Court has partly allowed the Reference and ordered reinstatement of the respondent-workman on his original post with continuity of service but without backwages. 2. Brief facts as can be noticed from the record of the case are to the effect that the respondent-workman was working as Driver with the petitioner-Corporation and while he was on duty, on 07th June, 1989 his bus dashed with one scooterist near Vejalpur between Dwarka – Shreenathji. As a result, pillion-rider of the scooter sustained injuries and ultimately succumbed to the injuries. A criminal complaint came to be lodged against the respondent-workman and on completion of the prosecution, respondent-workman came to be convicted by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class and was sentenced to undergo four ...
Tag this Judgment!Manharbhai Rupsingbhai Vasava Vs. State of Gujarat and Another
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-11-2012
CAV JUDGMENT N.V. ANJARIA The appellant, now aged 31, was tried in Sessions Case No.127 of 2005 for the offence of committing murder of one Ravindrabhai and came to be convicted for the offences punishable under sections 302 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (`IPC' for sake of brevity) by judgment and order dated 18.04.2006 delivered by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Bharuch. For the offence punishable under section 302, IPC, the appellant was sentenced to life imprisonment and fine of Rs.5000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for further three months. In respect of conviction for offence under section 323, IPC, he was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for further one month. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 2. The incident took place on 22.08.2005 at around 10.00 – 10.30 a.m. in the morning at a place 50 fee...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Jasvantsinh Fatesinh Handa and Othe ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-10-2012
ORAL JUDGMENT 1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 12.10.1999 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Panchmahals at Godhra in M.A.C.P. No.1486/1991 whereby, the claim petition was partly allowed. 2. The facts in brief are that on 07.08.1988 at around 1200 hrs., while respondent no.1 herein, original claimant, was going to Nadiad in a Jeep bearing registration no. GAM 8470 driven by original opponent no. 1, it turned turtle on account of the rash and negligent driving. As a result of the said accident, respondent no.1 severe bodily injuries and ultimately, respondent no.1 filed claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.7.00 lacs. However, the Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition by awarding Rs.3,98,000/- as compensation along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of application till its realization. Both the appellant-Insurance Company and respondent no.2 were jointly and severally held liable ...
Tag this Judgment!Vipulkumar Ramanlal Patel Through Poa Patel Ramanlal Vs. State of Guja ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-10-2012
V. M. SAHAI 1. By way of intra-court appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, the original petitioner has challenged the order dated 17.2.2012 passed in Special Civil Application No.2316 of 2012, by which learned Single Judge has refused to issue directions in the nature of writ of mandamus or certiorari directing the respondent to correct the date of birth of petitioner as 14.7.1978 instead of 25.8.1978 in birth certificate which was issued by Talati-cum-Mantri of village Santhal of District Mehsana. 2. The brief facts arising from the case are as under: 2.1. It is the case of the petitioner that he was born at village Santhal of village Mehsana on 14.7.1978. His birth was registered with Talati-cum-Mantri of village Santhal as provided under the provisions of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969. It is his case that by mistake the respondent no.2 i.e. Talati had mentioned his date of birth as 25.8.1978. It is his case that except in the birth certificate issued by res...
Tag this Judgment!Shailendrabhai S/O Late Shree Rajendrabhai Vs. Union of India Through ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-10-2012
ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The present First Appeal has been filed by the Appellant – Original Claimant under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) against the judgment and order dated 16.12.2011 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal in Case No. OA 0600044 on the grounds stated in the Appeal. It is contended inter alia that the deceased passenger along with other relatives visited the Veraval from her native from Madhya Pradesh. She was traveling in the train after purchasing ticket along with relatives, who boarded train no. 9222 Veraval – Ahmedabad Somnath Express from Veraval railway station. However, on 19.11.2005 when the said train was passing through K.M. No. 617 / 12 - 13 near Bala Road Railway Station and when the passenger was near the entry of the compartment, in order to attend a natural call, due to sudden jerk or the jolt of the train, deceased passenger fell down from the running train which has lead to f...
Tag this Judgment!Special Land Acquisition Officer and Others Vs. Parsottambhai Narsibha ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-10-2012
COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The present Appeals have been filed by the Appellant – State under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) read with Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 being aggrieved with the impugned judgment and order passed by the Reference Court [Civil Judge (SD), Bharuch] in Land Reference Case Nos. 1194 of 2001 to 1206 of 2001 [ Main Land Reference Case No. 1194 of 2001]. 2. Heard learned AGP Mr. Ronak Raval for the Appellant and learned Advocate Mr. K.M.Sheth for the Respondents – Original Claimants. 3. The Appellant – State has challenged the impugned judgment and award passed by the Reference Court in aforesaid Land Reference Cases awarding additional compensation of Rs.46.12p subject to the addition of 8% for 2 months, which is worked out to Rs.3.81p. Thus, the Reference Court has added this amount to the compensation of Rs.47.81p + Rs.3.81p and has accordingly assessed the value o...
Tag this Judgment!Rohitbhai Mohanbhai Patel Vs. Spl. Laq Officer
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-10-2012
COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The present First Appeals have been filed by the Appellants under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) being aggrieved with the impugned judgment and order rendered by the Reference Court [Extra Assistant Judge, Baroda] in Land Reference Case No. 62 of 1976 and 69 of 1976 respectively dated 29.11.1980. 2. As it appears, the land in question was acquired for the purpose of National Highway No.8 outside the Baroda City, for which the Notification under Section 4 was issued on 18.4.1972 and Notification under Section 6 was issued on 30.11.1972. 3. The present First Appeals are infact forming same group of the land acquisition for which the State had preferred First Appeal No. 1097 of 1981 to 1113 of 1981 challenging the impugned judgment and order of the Reference Court dated 4.11.1980 in Land Acquisition Reference No. 52 of 1976 to 69 of 1976. The additional co...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »