Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Mar-09-1983
Reported in : (1984)1GLR149
A.P. Ravani, J.1. This revision application is filed by the original-applicant wife whose application for condonation of delay in filing revision application before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Rajkot, against an order passed by the learned J.M.F.C, Gondal, on August 31, 1981 refusing to grant maintenance has been rejected. The cause advanced for not being able to file the revision application in time was that the mother of the applicant-wife was sick and she had to attend to her and hence she could not take further steps for filing the revision application in time. The judgment and order rejecting the application of the applicant-wife was passed on August 31, 1981 and the revision application was filed beyond the period of limitation and there was delay of about 108 days in filing the revision application. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot, took the view that there were other members of the family of the applicant-wife, i.e., the father, brother of the applicant, who ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Apr-06-1983
Reported in : (1983)2GLR1414
B.K. Mehta, J.1. Since the aforesaid two Special Civil Applications challenge the Rules for preparation of Merit List for admission to the Post-Graduate Medical Courses (hereinafter described as 'the Registration Rules') enacted by the Gujarat University in pursuance of the writ issued by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 3704 of 1982 Dr. Vikram K. Shah v. State of Guj. 24(1) G.L.R. 551 the judgment in which (Per N. H. Bhatt, J.) has been also questioned in the aforesaid Letters Patent Appeal, raising the common questions of law and fact, we propose to dispose of all the three matters by this common judgment.2. We will refer to the contesting parties in these matters by their respective position in reference to the Letters Patent Appeal.3. It is necessary to set out the material facts so as to appreciate the three dimensional dispute in proper perspective.4. In order to provide for proper training in basic medical sciences either related to the disciplines concerned for M. D....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Apr-12-1983
Reported in : (1983)2GLR1472
A.P. Ravani, J.1. What should be the approach of the Employees' State Insurance Corporation, the ESI Court and other authorities constituted under the provisions of the Employees' State Insurance Act while deciding the question of condonation of delay in filing claim petition and/or appeal before the appropriate authority? Should it be technical and archaic having no regard for the realities of life? Or, should it be informed with the changed values of our society and should have close connection with the realities of life? This question is required to be resolved in this appeal filed by an insured employee who sustained employment injury to his right band thumb and whose appeal has been dismissed by the lower authorities on the sole ground of limitation although it is found that he had a good case on merits.2. The appellant is an insured employee who was working as a weaver in Nagari Mills, a textile mill company and he met with an accident on October 23, 1978 on account of which he s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jan-12-1983
Reported in : (1983)34CTR(Guj)230; (1983)1GLR623; [1983]142ITR211(Guj)
Ahmadi, J. 1. Where any immovable property is subjected to acquisition under the provisions of Chap. XXA-of the I.T. Act. 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), can the tenants who are in occupation of different parts of the said property be evicted therefrom under s. 269I of the Act with a view to vesting it absolutely in the Central Government free from all encumbrances, is the question which we are required to consider in these three petitions brought by the tenants of the acquired property. The facts giving rise to these petitions, briefly stated, are as under : The property which is the subject-matte of acquisition is a three-storeyed building known as 'Shamalaji Kripa' standing on a parcel of land, bearing Tikka No. 8-3, Survey No. 3-7 of Revenue Survey No. 554/B, situate at Sayajiganj, Station road, Baroda. It consists of the ground floor and three storeys. The ground floor of the said property was let some time in November, 1966, to the Union Bank of India, Sayajiganj Branch, Bar...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Feb-14-1983
Reported in : AIR1984Guj126; (1983)2GLR961
V.V. Bedarkar, J.1. This involves point about an oral gift, trade by a Mahomedan and also an oral will, Some of the donees and legatees am actual heirs under the Mahomedan law, while the one, i.e., the plaintiff, who has filed the suit, is not.2. The suit property belonged to one Shah Mohmed Noor Mohmed. lie had four swis - (1) Ibrahim (appellant No. 1), (2) Usman (appellant No. 2), (3) Noor Mohmed (respondent No. 1's father), who died during the life-time of Shah Mohrrked and (4) Ismail. He had also one daughter narned Kulsumbibi (appellant No. 3).3. Plaintiff Noor Ahmed Noor Mohmed filed Civil Suit No. 3615 of 1973 on the ground that. his grand-father Shah Mohmed had made an oral gift of some properties which are mentioned in Schedule 'A, to the plaint, in favor of the three appellants and respondent No. 1 (plaintiff). This oral gift is alleged to have been made on 1-4-1953. It was also his case that before going to pilgrimage to Mecca, his grand-father also made an oral will in favo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Mar-03-1983
Reported in : (1983)2GLR1165
S.B. Majmudar, J.1. The petitioner who is a deemed purchaser of agricultural land bearing S. No. 800 admeasuring 3 acres and 34 Gunthas situated at village Mankani in Sankheda taluka of Baroda district has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution which in substance is one under Article 227 thereof, wherein he seeks to challenge the order passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal (GRT for short) in revision application TEN. B.A. 1290 of 1977. The said revision application came to be allowed by the GRT and the orders passed by the lower authorities were set aside. The petitioner submits that the GRT patently erred in law in doing so.2. In order to appreciate the grievance of the petitioner, it is necessary to glance through a few relevant facts. The petitioner who was the sitting tenant of the land in question was declared to be a deemed purchaser under the provisions of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 ('the Tenancy Act'). The petitioner, on account of h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Mar-08-1983
Reported in : (1984)1GLR29
S.L. Talati, J.1. A common question is raised in both the petitions and, therefore, these two petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment. Few relevant facts for the purpose of dealing with these petitions may be stated.2. In Special Civil Application No. 5412 of 1982 Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation valued for the purpose of assessment of property-tax for the financial year 1981-82 and its annual letting value effective on 10-9-1981 was fixed at Rs. 3,30,692/-. Appropriate entries were made in the assessment book under Taxation Rules. Dena Bank filed a complaint against the valuation but the valuation came to be confirmed by the Appellate Officer by his order dated 9-2-1982. Thereafter Dena Bank preferred Municipal Valuation Appeal No. 826 of 1982 before the Judge of the Court of Small Causes at Ahmedabad under Section 406 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949. While the appeal was pending on behalf of the respondent i.e. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Apr-05-1983
Reported in : AIR1983Guj217; (1983)2GLR1280
Majmudar, J. 1. The petitioner who is original responent 1 in the main first appeal and who was original defendant 1 in Special Civil Suit No. 37 of 1971 in the court of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rajkot, has requested this court by way of the present application to decide as a preliminary point the question regarding the maintainability of the first appeal. Earlier, a Division Bench of this court had directed on 23-2-1982 that this application be heard along with the main appeal. But subsequently, a later Division Bench of this court directed that this application be taken up for consideration earlier and the learned advocates of both the sides are agreed to this position and that is how this application reached final hearing before us yesterday. 2. In order to appreciate the grievance of the petitioner, centering round the maintainability of the first appeal, it will be necessary to quickly glance through a few relevant facts leading to the present litigation between ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Aug-03-1983
Reported in : AIR1984Guj98
ORDER1. The applicants were the opponents in Civil Misc, Application No. 200 of 1976 filed by the respondent in the Court of the Civil Judge (S. D.) :it Bhavnagar for the appointment of an Arbitrator in lieu of the Superintending Engineer, who was to act as an Arbitrator under Clause 30 of the contract between the parties in B-2 Form and who had allegedly neglected or refused to work as such.2. A short resume of facts - may be stated as under:-The applicant No, I-District Panchayat, Bhavnagar, acting through its Executive Engineer, District Panchayat Division, invited tenders for the work of flood damage repairs to Botad Turkha Road in B-2 form in the month of November 1970. The respondent, M/s. Mohmad Haji Gafur & Co-.. a registered Partnership firm), having its Office at Bhavnagar submitted the tender which was accepted by the Executive Engineer, District Panchayat Division. Bhavnagar on 4-12-1970. The applicants paid the security deposit as per the terms of the B-2 form which came t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Sep-01-1983
Reported in : AIR1984Guj49; (1984)1GLR691
B.K. Mehta, J.1. These three petitions have been separated from the group of petitions, being Special Civil Application No. 305 of 1979 and other companion .matters since the schools concerned in these three petitions are managed by religious minority communities which by these three petitions pray for appropriate writs, orders and directions declaring that Rules 106 (3) (e), 107 (3), 109 (2) and (4) and 115 of the Bombay Primary Education Rules, 1949, as ultra vires the Constitution and for quashing and setting aside the circulars issued by the Administrative Officer of the School Board, Ahmedabad fixing the pay scales and dearness allowance for the teachers in the private primary schools in exercise of' the power conferred under Schedule 'Y' as amended by the Bombay Primary Education (Gujarat Amendment) Rules, 1978, and for injunction restraining the State Government from enforcing the said circulars.2. In Special Civil Application No. 820/78 a further relief has been prayed for an a...
Tag this Judgment!