Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Sep-24-1968
Reported in : (1969)10GLR288
B.G. Thakor, J.1. The present Letters Patent Appeal is filed by the defendants against the decision and judgment of our learned brother, Bakshi, J. who was pleased to dismiss Second Appeal No. 1581 of 1960 which was also filed by the defendants. The suit out of which the present appeal arises was filed by the plaintiffs for dissolution of partnership and for taking accounts. One of the defences taken in the suit was that the subject matter of the suit was referred to arbitration and that the arbitrator had made an award and that therefore, the suit was not maintainable. The question raised in Second Appeal was whether it was open to the defendants to plead the existence of an award as a bar to the maintainability of a suit. His Lordship Bakshi, J. was pleased to hold that under the scheme of the Arbitration Act, an award or an arbitration award could be treated as effective only if a decree was obtained on the award in accordance with the arbitration. The view taken was that an award w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Apr-24-1968
Reported in : (1969)GLR710
ORDERA.S. Sarela, J. 1. The Special Civil Application No. 261/67 and the Civil Revision Application No. 227/67 are both concerned with a claim arising out of the same accident caused by a motor vehicle and as they raise identical questions and have been argued together they are being disposed of by a common judgment. 2. The material facts are these. One Miss Zarin Rustomji Munshi is the petitioner in both the cases. She was studying in M. Sayajirao University, Baroda, when while she was proceeding on the university road, also known as the National Highway Road, on her bycycle on 6-2-1963 at about 8.50 A. M. she was knocked down by a motor truck No, GTA 5429. That truck was driven by one Santubhai Manibhai Patel who is respondent No. 1 in both the cases. The truck belonged to one Bhupendra Chunilal Patel who is respondent No. 2 in both the cases. Respondent No. 3 in the special civil application is the Universal Fire and General Insurance Company. That Company is not made a party to the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Dec-10-1968
Reported in : (1969)GLR136; (1970)ILLJ408Guj
1. The petitioner, Central Excises Inspector, challenges in this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution the order of respondent 1, Collector, Central Excise, dated 7 November, 1951, which confirms the petitioner with effect form 3 March, 1956 but refuses to confirm him form the earlier date, i.e., 1 October, 1951, which according to the petitioner was the due date on which the vacancy arose in which he should have been confirmed. The petitioner was originally appointed as a tobacco inspector in the former Baroda State on 1 March, 1945 in the grade of Rs. 80 to 110. On 1 April, 1948 he was promoted as a senior grade inspector. The petitioner was not made permanent during the former Baroda State regime and had no line on any substantive post. On the merger of the Baroda State on 1 May, 1994 the petitioner was absorbed as the Inspector of Central Excise from 1 May, 1949. He was given seniority from 3 july 1946 on the basis of the orders of seniority and as per the provisional list of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Dec-10-1968
Reported in : (1969)10GLR136
J.B. Mehta, J.1. The petitioner, Central Excise Inspector, challenges in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the order of respondent No. 1, Collector, Central Excise, dated 7th November 1959, which confirms the petitioner with effect from 3rd March 1956 but refuses to confirm him from the earlier date i.e. 1st October 1951, which according to the petitioner was the due date on which the vacancy arose in which he should have been confirmed. The petitioner was originally appointed as a Tobacco Inspector in the former Baroda State on 1st March 1945 In the grade of Rs. 80 to 110. On 1st April 1948 he was promoted as a senior grade inspector. The petitioner was not made permanent during the former Baroda State regime and had no lien on any substantive post. On the merger of the Baroda State on 1st May 1949 the petitioner was absorbed as the Inspector of Central Excise from 1st May 1949. He was given seniority from 3rd July 1946 on the basis of the orders of seniority and as ...
Tag this Judgment!