Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Mar-06-1961
Reported in : (1962)3GLR33
V.B. Raju, J.1. This is an appeal by the State of Gujarat against the acquittal of the respondent who was charged with having committed an offence punishable under Section 34 of the Bombay Money Lenders Act for having contravened Section 18(2) of the same Act in that he did not send copies of the accounts in respect of three money-lending transactions dated 24-12-57 27 and 30-12-57 relating to loans advanced by him to Kisnad Group Co-operative Multi-purpose Society. The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Broach who tried the case acquitted the respondent on the ground that a loan to a Co-operative society was not included in the definition of loan contained in Section 2(9) of the Bombay Money-Lenders Act. On this ground he acquitted the respondent although according to the Magistrate all the facts about the advancing of the loans were admitted by the respondent who was accused.2. In appeal it is contended by the learned Government Pleader on behalf of the State that the view taken...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Dec-13-1961
Reported in : (1962)3GLR574
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This Revision Application arises out of a suit filed by the plaintiffs against the defendant to recover possession of certain premises situate on Dudheshwar Road Ahmedabad. The premises consist of a structure known as Chhagan Kishor Iron Factory. It appears that from 1931 the defendant was in possession of the premises as a tenant of the plaintiffs. A deed of lease was executed by the between the plaintiffs and the defendant on 28 the November 1942 whereby a lease of the premises was granted by the plaintiffs to be defendant for a period of five years from 1st February 1942 at the rent and on the terms and conditions contained in the deed of lease. There was some dispute between the parties as to whether the plaintiffs were the lessors under the deed of lease or whether the lessors were Dhirajlal Khushaldas and Company Agents of the plaintiffs. I shall discuss this aspect of the matter later but for the purpose of the present narration I shall proceed on the basis t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Nov-21-1961
Reported in : (1962)3GLR512
K.T. Desai, C.J.1. This second appeal raises an important question of law in action with the period of limitation for execution of orders which are to be deemed to be decrees of a Civil Court on a certificate being signed by the Registrar under the provisions of Section 89(1)(a) of the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act 1925 In view of the importance of the matter Justice Bakshi before whom the matter first appeared has referred the same to a Division Bench.2. The facts giving rise to this second appeal briefly stated are the following: The respondent society is a co-operative society which was registered under the Baroda Co-operative Societies Act. The appellant was a member of that society. Disputes arose between the first respondent and the appellant. The same were referred to the Registrars nominee for decision under the provisions of the aforesaid Act. On 28th April 1942 the Registrars nominee made an award against the appellant as the principal debtor and against respondents 2 and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Oct-31-1961
Reported in : AIR1962Guj128; (1962)0GLR269
Desai, C.J. 1. This Special Full Bench has been constituted in order to consider the question relating to the binding nature of the judicial precedents of the Bombay High Court prior to 1st May, 1960, on this High Court. This very matter was considered by a Full Bench of three Judges of this Court including the then Chief Justice in the case of Anand Municipality v. Union of India, reported in : AIR1960Guj40 . Later on, a Division Bench of this Court consisting of Mr. Justice Raju and Mr. Justice Bakshi found it difficult to accept the view expressed by the Full Bench in the aforesaid case and made a request for referring the question to another Full Bench for a re-consideration of the matter. It was held by the Full Bench of this Court in the aforesaid case of (1960) 1 Guj LR 82 : (AIR 1960 Gujarat 40) (FB) that the judicial precedents of the Bombay High Court prior to the 1st of May, 1960, i. e., the day on which the State of Gujarat came into being fell within the ambit of the words...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Sep-06-1961
Reported in : AIR1963Guj32
K.K. Mehta, J.1. This is a civil revision application against an order passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Morvi, allowing an Amendment of the prayer by the substituted applicant in Probate Case No. 8/1957 on the file of the learned Judge. The matter arises this way:-The deceased testatrix Bai Jivubai made a will dated 14th December, 1946, appointing one Jadeja Shivubha Madhavsang as an executor of her said will. After the death of the testatrix, Shivubha applied for the probate of the will on 6th February, 1957. The four opponents to the said application were the heirs of the deceased and each of them was a beneficiary under the will of the deceased testatrix. The applicant executor died pending probate proceedings on 17th January, 1960. On the 25th January, 1960, opponent No. 1 in the original Probate Application, Jadeja Mangalsinhji Shivsinhji, who is also opponent No. 1 in the present revision application applied to the Probate Court that he be transposed as a plain...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Aug-29-1961
Reported in : AIR1962Guj194; (1962)0GLR85
Shelat, J.1. This is a petition for a writ of prohibitionrestraining the respondents from deporting orexterning the petitioner from out of the territoryof India, the petitioner's case being that he is acitizen of India.2. The petitioner entered India on November 17, 1954. on a Pakistani passport dated the 2nd of November 1954 bearing No. 239028. After coming to India he was employed by his cousin, one Yusuf Ismail Lala, a forest contractor carrying on business in Godhra, first as a cleaner and thereafter as a driver of a motor-truck. The petitioner obtained a licence from the R.T.O.. Baroda, for . the purpose of enabling him to drive the motortruck, and got himself married to one Kulsum, the daughter of Moosa Gafur of village Vejalpur in district Panchmahals. Thereafter he was prosecuted in criminal case No. 743 of 1958 in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Godhra, on a charge under See. 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, read with paragraph 7 of the Foreigners Order, 1948...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Aug-08-1961
Reported in : AIR1963Guj15; 1963CriLJ162; (1962)GLR701
Shelat, J.12. On behalf of the accused, Mr. Mankad raisedcertain questions of law regarding the jurisdiction of thelearned trial Judge and misjoinder of charges. Briefly stated, his contentions were as follows:(1) That the learned Special Judge had no jurisdiction to try the accused on the charge under Section 477A of the Penal Code.(2) That the trial suffered from illegality as thecharges were in contravention of Sections 233 and 234 of the Code of Criminal Procedure inasmuch as the offences or criminal breach of trust under Section 409 of the Penal Code, misconduct arising from the acts of criminal breach of trust and falsifications of accounts in respect of the sums of Rs. 40/-, Rs. 15/- and Rs. 392/- could not be joined together and the accused could not be validly tried in one joint trial.(3) That the acts of misconduct as defined in 5. 5 (1) (c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act were in respect of four distinct sums, viz., Rs. 40/-, Rs. 15/-, Rs. 20/-end Rs. 392/- and as the pr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jul-20-1961
Reported in : (1962)0GLR492
Raju, J.1. This is a first appeal by the original plaintiff J. J. Mody who was appointed as regional publicity officer on 8 November, 1949. He was dismissed from service on 6 December, 1950 after having been suspended from service earlier, and a departmental inquiry was held into the allegations that he had made some defamatory aspersions against some Ministers of the Government of the Bombay State. This order of dismissal was, however, set aside in Civil Suit No. 10 of 1952 filed by the appellant. After the decision of that suit, the Government passed an order on 26 May, 1954 continuing his suspension from 6 December, 1950 and gave second notice to the appellant to show cause why he should not be removed from service. On 29 December, 1954, the Government passed an order dismissing the appellant from service. The present suit was thereupon filed by the appellant on 30 September, 1955 for a declaration that he is not guilty of any misconduct, that the second order of suspension dated 26...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jul-20-1961
Reported in : AIR1962Guj197; (1962)IILLJ507Guj
Raju, J. 1. This is a first appeal by the original plaintiff J. J. Mody, who was appointed is Regional Publicity Officer on 8-11-1949. He was dismissed from service on 6-12-1950 after having been suspended from service earlier, and a departmental inquiry was held into the allegations that he had made some defamatory aspersions against some Ministers of the Government of the Bombay State. This order cf dismissal was, however, set aside in Civil Suit No. 10 of 1952 filed by the appellant. After the decision of that suit the Government passed an order on 26-5-54 continuing his suspension from 6-12-1950 and gave a second notice to the appellant to show cause why he should not be removed from service. On 20-12-1954, the Government passed an order dismissing the appellant from service. The present suit was thereupon filed by the appellant on 30-9-1955 for a declaration that he is not guilty of any misconduct, that tho second order of suspension dated 26-5-1954, and the second order of dismis...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jul-18-1961
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!