Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1966)7GLR1
J.M. Shelat, C.J.1. On April 29, 1961, Sir Vijaysinhji Chhatrasinhji, the then ruler of Rajpipla State, expired leaving him surviving three sons, of whom the present petitioner was the second son. According to the petitioner, the said Sir Vijaysinhji, in accordance with the custom prevailing in the family of the rulers of Rajpipla, passed an order on August 19, 1946, which was to have effect from July 1, 1946, whereunder he granted to the petitioner, for the purpose of providing maintenance to him, three villages, namely, Amletha, Tropa and Ori, yielding an annual revenue of Rs. 15, 533, the revenue thereof and in addition thereto, a sum of Rs. 20, 467/- as and by way of cash allowance payable every year. In pursuance of that order, the said Sir Vijaysinhji, as the ruler of the Rajpipla State, issued a Sanad. The Sanad inter alia provided that the petitioner was to be the full owner of the entire revenue of the said three villages irrespective of any increase that might be caused by an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 1961CriLJ78
ORDERBhagwati, J.1. The short and interesting question' which arises in this Criminal Revision Application is as regards the weight to be attached to a report of a Chemical Examiner when the report is tender ed as evidence under Section 510 of the Code of Criminal Procedure without summoning and examining the Chemical Examiner as to the subject-matter of the report. The accused was tried by the Jadicial Magistrate, First Class, Broach for the offence of consuming liquor tinder Section 66(1)(b) oft the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 hereinafter referred to by me as the Act. The charge against-the accused was that on 16th December, 1959 at about 5-45 P.M., he was found on a public road having consumed liquor in contravention of the provisions of the Act. A sample of the blood of1 the accused was taken by the police and submitted to the Chemical Examiner to the Government for determining the concentration of alcohol in the-blood. Though the sample of the blood was taken on 16th' December, 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1985)1GLR339
M.B. Shah1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and order dated 18-7-84 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nadiad, in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 209 of 1984 rejecting their application for bail under Section 167(2)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioners have preferred this application.2. The petitioners were arrested on 3rd April 1984 for causing murder of one Kantibhai Becharbhai. They were produced before the Judicial Magistrate on 4th April 1984. From 4th April 1984 they are in judicial custody. The investigating officer submitted charge-sheet on 3rd July 1984. 1st July 1984 was Sunday and 2nd July 1984 was declared as public holiday by the State Government on account of death of Shri Ravishanker Maharaj. The petitioners filed an application on 12th July 1984 before the learned Sessions Judge, Kaira at Nadiad, for releasing them on bail on the ground that charge-sheet was not submitted within 90 days as 90 days were over on 2nd July 1984 an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2003)4GLR3500
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard Mr. A.M. Dagli, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner-Corporation and Mr. Jaswant K. Shah, learned Advocate for respondent-workman.2. Rule. Mr. Dagli, learned Advocate for petitioner-Corporation and Mr. J.K. Shah, learned Advocate for respondent-workman waive formal service of Rule in these cross petitions on behalf of the respective parties. Therefore, these two matters are heard finally at the admission stage with the consent of the parties.3. In these two petitions, both the parties have challenged the common award passed by the Labour Court, Ahmedabad in Reference No. 131 of 1996 dated 5th November, 2001. The Labour Court has granted reinstatement with continuity of service with 40% back wages of the interim period. Today, when these two petitions, learned Advocate Mr. Dagli for petitioner-Corporation has tendered before this Court draft amendment in a petition-Spl.C.A. No. 3104 of 2002 filed by petitioner-Corporation. Said draft amendment i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 1985CriLJ293; (1985)1GLR169(GJ)
P.S. Poti, C.J.1. A Division Bench of this Court, while hearing a batch of petitions challenging the detention orders passed by the Central Government under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, was called upon to consider the validity of a declaration made by the empowered officer of the Central Government under Section 9 of the said Act as amended by Ordinance No. 8 of 1984. The Ordinance substituted Section 9 of the Act by a new section. The new section reads as follows :9. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, any person (including a foreigner) in respect of 'whom an order of detention is made under this Act at any time before the 31st day of July, 1987 may be detained without obtaining, in accordance with the provisions of Sub-clause (a) of clause (4) of Article 22 of the Constitution, the opinion of an Advisory Borard for a period longer than three months but not exceeding six months from the date of his detention, wh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : I(1991)ACC529; 1991ACJ585; (1991)1GLR352
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kutch at Bhuj, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 14 of 1975, by invoking the aids of the provisions of Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 ('Act' for short hereinafter).2. A short, but interesting, question which has arisen in this appeal is, as to whether legal representatives of the deceased claimant, who had sustained injuries in a vehicular accident and who had died a death unconnected with the injuries which arose but of the road accident, are entitled to continue the action for compensation? With a view to appreciate the aforesaid question raised in this appeal, a resume of material facts may be stated at the outset.3. One deceased Abdul Karim Musa, who is hereinafter referred to as the 'original claimant' for the sake of convenience and brevity, claimed Rs. 9,999/- by way of compensation for the personal injuries sustained by him in an accident on accou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1962)3GLR117
A.R. Bakshi, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 72(4) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, against the order dated 22nd June 1957 passed by the learned District Judge, Broach in Miss. Application No. 14 of 1956 filed before him under Section 72 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950, setting aside the order passed by the Charity Commissioner in Change Application No. 181 of 1953.2. A few facts relating to this matter may be stated. On 25th November 1953 a report of a change in the trustees was made to the Assistant Charity Commissioner under Section 22 of the Act. That application was contested by those respondents who claimed themselves to be the members of the Broach Jain Sangh having the right to appoint trustees. An enquiry under the provisions of Section 22 was started and was transferred to the Deputy Charity Commissioner who held the enquiry with the aid of assessors. On a consideration of the evidence, the Deputy Charity Commissioner held that the old trustees wanted to resign, but...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1986)1GLR660
A.P. Ravani, J. 1. The Parliament has by repeated amendments emphasized the statutory determination to stamp out food adulteration offences by severe sentences and being dissatisfied with the indulgent exercise of judicial discretion, the Legislature has deprived the court of its discretionary power in the matter of imposition of sentence. Then why the courts should continue to be soft towards offenders of food adulteration cases. When sentence of Simple Imprisonment, instead of Rigorous Imprisonment is imposed on such offenders, instead of the offender, is the society not punished? This question arises in the background of the facts that below (sic follow).2. These two revision applications arise out of a criminal case pertaining to an offence under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). It was alleged that the accused sold cow milk to the complainant-Food Inspector on December 23, 1976. On analysis of the milk sold, it was found that it ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1996)1GLR798
H.R. Shelat, J.1. By this application, the State has brought the order dated 30-11-1994, passed by the then learned Additional Sessions Judge at Vadodara, in Criminal Appeal No. 27 of 1994 on his file, setting aside the order dated 12-5-1994, passed by the then Dy. Conservator of Forest at Chhota-Udepur, and directing the petitioner to hand over the teak wood seized together with Rs. 1,000/-, the amount of penalty, to the opponent, under challenge.2. Owing to Narmada Dam Project certain lands and many villages were likely to be immersed in water. The Government of Gujarat planned for the rehabilitation of those affected not only providing lands elsewhere but building materials and some amounts also. The persons affected were permitted to take wreckage of their huts, and trees grown on their lands. Kanubhai Shankerbhai, Naika Jugla Vasava and others affected, migrated from Sinduri a Village in Dhule District of Maharashtra State to Suratalav/Tarsada along with wreckage, i.e., baulk, joi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1998)1GLR372
N.J. Pandya, J.1. The petition relates to the election held in the month of February 1995. The petitioner was contesting the election from 26-Jamnagar Rural (Reserved S.C.) Constituency for the State Assembly. He was defeated by respondent No. 1. The grievance made in the petition is that respondent No. 1 succeeded in the election by corrupt practice. The corrupt practices alleged are as under:(i) that the petitioner was not only a sitting member but a member of the Cabinet of the State Government ruled, at the relevant time, by the Indian National Congress and he had got printed a hand-bill setting out the alleged achievement of respondent No. 1. What is objectionable to the said hand-bill Annexure B page 30 is that National Flag was printed diagonally on the top right hand comer on its reverse side of the hand-bill;(ii) that an anti-social element was not only given protection by respondent No. 1 but had seen to it that he is not detained under PASA, though a warrant was issued again...
Tag this Judgment!