Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Nov-17-1990
Reported in : 1991ACJ904; (1991)1GLR361; (1993)IIILLJ611Guj
Bhatt, J. 1. In this appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter 'Act' for short), the appellant has assailed the judgment and award passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation ('Commissioner' for short, hereinafter), at Bhavnagar, on 10.8.1982, in an application for compensation being Workmen Compensation Application No. 10 of 1982. Various interesting points are raised and a multi prolonged attack is also made against the claim of compensation. Therefore, the appeal was heard at a marathon length. Since various significant points are raised and with a view to appreciate the merits of the present appeal and challenge against it, it would be pertinent at this juncture to set out relevant and material facts. 2. The present appellant is the original claimant who preferred an application for compensation for personal injuries sustained by him, under Section 3 of the Act. The claimant made the application for compensation of Rs. 3528/-unde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Nov-19-1990
Reported in : II(1991)ACC342
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. This appeal under Section 30 of the Workmens' Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter 'Act' for short), the appellant has assailed the judgment and award passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation ('Commissioner' for short, hereinafter), at Bhavnagar 10.8.1982, in an application for compensation being workman compensation Application No. 10 of 1982.2. Various interesting points are raised and a multi prolonged attack is also made against the claim of compensation. Therefore, the appeal was heard at a marathon length. Since various significant points are raised and with a view to appreciate the merits of the present appeal and challenge against it, it would be pertinent at this juncture to set out relevant and material facts.3. The present appellant is the original claimant who preferred an application for compensation for personal injuries sustained by him, under Section 3 of the Act. The claimant made the application for compensation of Rs. 3528/- under...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Mar-13-1990
Reported in : II(1991)ACC89; 1991ACJ638; [1991(63)FLR854]; (1991)1GLR42; (1995)IIILLJ211Guj
1. Bhairavia, J: Is an employee of the State Government, being a Civil servant, not covered by the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923? Even when earning of a workman may increase after he suffers an accident would he be entitled to claim compensation from the employer? These are some of the questions which have arisen in this appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 filed by the employer-State of Gujarat. Respondent workmen was serving as forest guard. On May 14, 1984 while on duty he saw a matador vehicle loaded with logs of wood. As part of his duty to safeguard the forest wood he intercepted the matador and tried to detain it. But he could not. Hence he pursued the matador and over reached the same. On being questioned, the inmates of the matador got angry and one of them assaulted the workman and inflicted sword blow on his right hand. He was removed to Civil Hospital at Ahmedabad and was required to undergo treatment for some time. He was ult...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Dec-05-1990
Reported in : I(1993)ACC226
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. By this appeal, under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 ('Act for short, hereinafter), the appellants, who are heirs of the deceased victim of employment injuries, have challenged the judgment and award passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation ('Commissioner' for short, hereinafter), at Nadiad, on 5.5.1981, in Workmen's Compensation Case No. 25 of 1978. In order to appreciate the merits of this appeal and challenge against it, it would be necessary to set out matehal and relevant facts giving rise to the present appeal.2. The present appellants are the original applicants and the present respondent is the original opponent. They are, hereinafter, referred to as the 'applicants' and 'opponent' for be sake of convenience and brevity.3. The applicants, who are the parents of the deceased victim of an employment accident, claimed compensation of Rs. 18,000/-, stating that their son died on account of injuries sustained by him out of an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Dec-05-1990
Reported in : 1992ACJ740; (1992)1GLR7; (1993)IIILLJ240Guj
Bhatt, J. 1. By this appeal, under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 ('Act' for short, hereinafter), the appellants, who are heirs of the deceased victim of an employment injuries, have challenged the judgment and award passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation ('Commissioner' for short, hereinafter), at Nadiad, on 5-5-1981, in Workmen's Compensation Case No. 25 of 1978. In order to appreciate the merits of this appeal and challenge against it, it would be necessary to set out material and relevant facts giving rise to the present appeal.2. The present appellants are the original applicants and the present respondent is the original opponent. They are, hereinafter, referred to as the 'applicants' and 'opponent' for the sake of convenience and brevity.3. The applicants, who are the parents of the deceased victim of an employment accident, claimed compensation of Rs. 18,000/- stating that their son died on account of injuries sustained by him out of a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Nov-21-1990
Reported in : (1991)1GLR410
Shah, J.1. National Dairy Development Board Employees' Union has filed this petition against the order dated December 18, 1989 (Annexure 'D') passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Baroda, refusing to refer the matter to the Industrial Tribunal on the ground that the workmen, who have raised the dispute, were workmen, who have raised the dispute, were workmen of the Contractors and not that of National Dairy Development Board, Anand The petitioner has prayed that respondents Nos. 1 and 2 be directed to refer the aforesaid dispute to the Industrial Tribunal for decision under Section 10 of the Industrial Dispute Act for the demands made in the letter dated January 3, 1989, which is produced at Annexure 'A'. The petitioner-Union demanded permanent grades and consequent revision of pay scales, as per the said demands. 2. In this petition, it has been submitted that the State Government or the Labour Commissioner was required to refer the matter to the Industrial Tribunal, because the q...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jun-29-1990
Reported in : AIR1991Guj107; (1991)1GLR259
ORDER1. The petitioners who are medical graduates and who have completed their Internship, have filed this petition for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents namely, the Dean of S.S.G. Hospital, Baroda, Director (Health) in Civil Hospital, Ahmedabad, and the Secretary to the Government at Gandhinagar, to fill in 95 seats in P. G. Studies instead of 78 seats allotted so far. It is their submission that the respondents are not adhering to the ratio laid down in the recommendations by the Medical Council of India for the postgraduate medical education, which have acquired a statutory force. Thus the petitioners' claim revolves around the interpretation of these recommendations.2. However, in the course of hearing the scope of this inquiry was sought to be enlarged, and the learned advocate for the petitioners requested the Court to consider the conflicting demands of (i) medical graduates of 'regular' 'batch passing their degree examination at the end of the regular terms, (ii) oth...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Apr-11-1990
Reported in : AIR1991Guj23; (1990)2GLR350
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. The petitioners in all these petitions are medical students. Some of them have passed Third M.B.B.S. examination; are at present undergoing Internship and they will be seeking admission to post-graduate degree/ diploma medical courses in the academic term this year beginning from March, 1990. They are challenging the Rules Governing Admissions to Post-Graduate Degree & Diploma Medical Courses other than M. C. H. & D. M., at the affiliated Medical Colleges, effective from 1-1-1989, as some of the Rules will certainly and some are likely to affect them adversely in determination of their merit for the purpose of admission to post-graduate medical courses.2. Petitioners in Special Civil Application No. 336/90 are students, at present studying in First M.B.B.S. They are all outsiders, in the sense that they passed their Higher Secondary Certificate Examination or equivalent examination from other States and not from Gujarat. They got admission to First M.B.B.S. course i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jul-31-1990
Reported in : (1991)1GLR226
M.B. Shah, J.1. In Sessions Case No. 69 of 1987 by the judgment and order dated 29th September, 1987 passed by the Additional City Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad, the appellants-original accused Nos. 1, 5 and 6 are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them is sentenced to suffer R.I. for life and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to suffer R.I. for six months.2. Accused Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 7 are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them is sentenced to suffer R.I. far life and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to suffer R.I. for six months but they are acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.3. Accused No. 5 is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code for causing injuries by spear to witnesses Mahammad Yamin, Abdulrazak and Mahammad Ismail and is sentenc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Dec-15-1990
Reported in : (1991)1GLR454
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. By this Appeal under Section 72(4) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 ('BPT Act' for short, hereinafter), the appellants have challenged the judgment and order passed by the learned Joint Charity Commissioner, in Revision Application No. 16 of 1971.2. In this appeal, a very short, but significant, question which has been raised for adjudication is, as to whether the Jain Derasar, known as 'Shri Shantinathji Jain Derasar' is a private temple or a public trust temple. With a view to appreciate the merits of this appeal to the present appeal, may be narrated, as the outset.3. A Jain temple known as 'Shri Shantinathji Jain Derasar' ('disputed temple' hereinafter for the sake of convenience and brevity), situated at Gopipura, in Oswal Mohalla, in the city of Surat and according to the case of appellants is a private family religious temple, established in S.Y. 1939 (1883 AD). The disputed temple property is registered, originally, with City Survey No. 1513, in Ward No. 1...
Tag this Judgment!