Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: gujarat Year: 2003 Page 1 of about 51 results (0.008 seconds)

Jul 22 2003 (HC)

Jivanbhai Talsibhai Vasava Vs. State of Gujarat

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Jul-22-2003

Reported in : (2004)1GLR460; (2004)1GLR461

..... has fairly accepted that one jemal vasava had lodged the complaint against deceased abhesing and after the incident of deena, accused ashwin had acted as mediator and ultimately, the dispute was settled and according to him, as ashwin was active in the talks of settlement, he had developed belief that ..... the incident, when deceased abhesing was assaulted. it is established by mr. brahambhatt that investigating agency has selected short cut by involving accused persons and mediator ashvinbhai as a party in the incident, which has taken place between two families, in respect of deena.32. it is also one of the ..... has fairly accepted that one jemal vasava had lodged the complaint against deceased abhesing and after the incident of deena, accused ashwin had acted as mediator and ultimately, the dispute was settled and according to him, as ashwin was active in the talks of settlement, he had developed belief that ..... the incident, when deceased abhesing was assaulted. it is established by mr. brahambhatt that investigating agency has selected short cut by involving accused persons and mediator ashvinbhai as a party in the incident, which has taken place between two families, in respect of deena.8. it is also one of the ..... the deceased abhesing was a young unmarried man of 22 years of age and was residing with his father jesing. abhesing was thereafter persuaded by mediators and girl deena being minor i.e. below 18 years, it was decided to hand over the custody of minor deena to her parents and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 01 2003 (HC)

Bank of Baroda Vs. Nadiad Machinery and Electrical Merchant Credit Co- ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Oct-01-2003

Reported in : (2004)1GLR50

..... bank of baroda are situated and operating at the places where the depositors are having their offices.2. for the purpose of procuring deposits from the aforesaid depositors, they engaged mediators/middlemen/brokers which is contrary to the norms and instructions of the bank. further, they involved a channel of middlemen/brokers right from the stage of opening of the accounts .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 19 2003 (HC)

Gopiraj Dedraj Agrawal (Gopiram Tudraj Agrawal) Vs. State of Gujarat

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Sep-19-2003

Reported in : (2004)1GLR237

k.a. puj, j. 1. the petition is filed under article 227 of the constitution of india challenging the order passed by the joint secretary, revenue department (disputes), state of gujarat, ahmedabad, in revision application no. 46 of 1995 on 27.6.2003 whereby he has dismissed the revision application and set aside the mutation entry no. 2526 dated 27.4.1984 inspite of the fact that in pursuance of the order of the collector, ahmedabad dated 5.12.1994, mamlatdar & alt, dascroi taluka held the inquiry under section 84-c of the bombay tenancy and agricultural lands act, 1948 (for short 'the tenancy act') by registering case no. 112 of 1994.2. it is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners have purchased the land bearing survey no. 1525/65 situated in the sim of village ognaj from its owner madhukantaben asharam and others by registered sale deed dated 17.10.1979. the said transaction of sale has been certified by the mutation entry no. 1933 on 18.10.1979. there is another land bearing survey no. 996/1 admeasuring 0 acre, 21 gunthas situated in the sim of village ognaj. the said land was originally belonged to one bai joiti, widow of chaturbhai patel. the said bai joiti executed the will dated 2.12.1975 in favour of the petitioners giving the said land bearing survey no. 996/1. it was also stated in the said will that she has executed the said will after obtaining consent of all the heirs. she had also given other properties to other heirs. the said will was executed before .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 09 2003 (HC)

Babubhai Bhagwanji Mehta Vs. State of Gujarat Special Secretary (Appea ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Oct-09-2003

Reported in : (2004)1GLR532

b.j. shethna, j. 1. the appellants-original petitioners are husband and sons of late smt. shantaben babulal mehta. she purchased land bearing survey no.18 of village-umargam, dist. valsad from one vithal kambali on 23rd february, 1956. mutation entry no. 1411 was effected on 28th april, 1956. however, concerned authority made an endorsement that the said land was fragment and the sale having made in contravention of the provisions of bombay prevention of fragmentation and consolidation act, 1948 (for short 'the act'), therefore, the said mutation entry was required to be cancelled and accordingly it was cancelled on 7th august, 1957. this was done behind the back of shantaben without giving any opportunity of hearing to her. shantaben died in 1976 without the knowledge that mutation entry regarding the land in question purchased by her was cancelled by the authority on 7th august, 1957. because of this her legal heirs and representatives i.e. her husband and her sons were also in know of the fact that the mutation entry was cancelled by the authority in 1957, till 1991.2. it is the case of the appellants-petitioners that as soon as they came to know about the cancellation of mutation entry in 1957, they immediately filed rts appeal no. 100/91 before the deputy collector challenging the order dated 7th august, 1957 passed by the authority cancelling mutation entry regarding the land in question. however, the said appeal was dismissed by the deputy collector, on the technical .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 24 2003 (HC)

Ratilal Govindji Nayak Vs. State of Gujarat

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Mar-24-2003

Reported in : (2003)4GLR515

d.p. buch, j.1. this is an appeal under section 374 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 (for short, 'code') in order to challenge the judgment and conviction order dated 20.7.1987 in special case no. 2 of 1983 under which the learned special judge, surat convicted the present appellant for offence punishable under section 5(2) of the prevention of corruption act, 1947 and sentenced him to suffer r.i. for three months. the trial court also directed the appellant to pay fine of rupees two hundred. in default of payment of fine, the appellant was directed to undergo further r.i. for 15 days. the appellant was also convicted for an offence punishable under section 161 of indian penal code. however, no separate sentence was imposed on him for that offence.2. the facts of the case of the prosecution before the trial court may be briefly stated as follows:in september, 1981, the present appellant was functioning as talati-cum-mantri, group gram panchayat in palsana taluka of surat district and as such he was a public servant. the informant had filed a fir before the concerned police station on 22.9.1981. it seems that about 3-4 months prior to the date of filing of fir, the informant dayaram zaverbhai mistry was required to have mutation of entries of agricultural land in his name on the basis of a will executed by his father. it seems that the said informant approached the appellant for the said purpose and, therefore, the appellant prepared certain notices and other documents .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 21 2003 (HC)

Bhagwanbhai Karamanbhai Bharvad Vs. Arogyanagar Co-op. Housing Society ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Feb-21-2003

Reported in : AIR2003Guj294; (2004)1GLR506

kundan singh, j.1. rule. heard the learned counsel for the parties. both these petitions are filed against the judgment and order dated 30-8-2002 passed by the fourth extra assistant judge, ahmedabad (rural). navrangpura in misc. civil appeals no. 95 of 2001 and 96 of 2001. as both these petitions are arising out of the same judgment and order of the trial court, these petitions are disposed of by common judgment.2. the plaintiff filed regular civil suit no. 513 of 1999 for declaration and permanent injunction along with the application exh. 5 for interim injunction. the defendants also filed an application exh. 51 for vacating ex parte interim order, wherein both the parties were directed to maintain status quo vide order dated 23-11-2001 by the trial court. initially, the ex parte order was passed by the trial court but subsequently after hearing both the parties to the aforesaid suit, the final order of status quo was passed allowing the application exh. 5 and confirmed the ex parte interim order and rejected the application exh. 51 of the defendants. against the said common judgment and order dated 23-11-2001 passed in the aforesaid civil suit, the plaintiff also filed civil misc. appeal no. 96 of 2001 and the defendant no. 6 filed civil misc. appeal no. 95 of 2001. civil misc. appeal no. 96 of 2001 filed by the plaintiff was allowed and civil misc. appeal no. 95 of 2001 of the defendant no. 6 was dismissed by the 4th extra assistant judge, ahmedabad (rural) vide his .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 18 2003 (HC)

Legal Heirs of Pinjara Jiva Nura Vs. State of Gujarat

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Sep-18-2003

Reported in : (2004)1GLR191

k.a. puj, j. 1. the petitioners are the legal heirs of deceased jiva nura. the petitioner no.1 is the wife and petitioner nos. 2 to 4 are the sons of deceased jiva nura. the petitioners have filed the present petition under article 226 of the constitution of india challenging the actions of the additional collector, rajkot directing the mamlatdar, rajkot by his letter dtd. 31.07.1999 and the action of the mamlatdar, rajkot directing the talati-cum-mantri, city chavdi, rajkot by his letter dtd. 16.08.1999 and the action of the talati-cum-mantri to make the mutation entry in the record of rights on 01.04.2000, on the basis of the order passed by the additional collector on 23.02.1987 under the provisions of urban land (ceiling & regulation) act, despite the fact that the said order dtd. 23.02.1987 was taken in review under section 34 of the said act before the secretary, revenue department, (ulc) gandhinagar. according to the petitioner, all these actions of the respondent authorities are absolutely illegal, unlawful, contrary to the statutory provisions and in violation of urban land (ceiling & regulation) repealed act, 1999.2. it is the case of the petitioners that deceased jiva nura became the owner of the land bearing survey no. 130/15, admeasuring 3 acres - 19 gunthas and survey no. 110 admeasuring 2 acres - 34 gunthas of moje rajkot and since then the said jiva nura and after his death, their heirs were cultivating the said land for agricultural purposes and they are .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 24 2003 (HC)

Valimohmad Pirmohd Shaikh Vs. State of Gujarat

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Jul-24-2003

Reported in : (2003)3GLR2742

d.a. mehta, j. 1. this petition has been preferred challenging the action of the respondent - state authorities in directing cancellation of entry nos.971, 972, 973 and 974 dated 14-05-1982.1.1. in special civil application nos.9037/1992, 9038/1992, 9039/1992 and 9040/1992 the petitioner has challenged the action of the revenue authority of cancelling the auction sale. 2. it is common ground between the parties that the parties are the same in all the five petitions and the facts stated in special civil application no.769 of 1989 shall govern the other petitions also. hence, all the petitions are taken for hearing and disposal together. 3. the petitioner is the chief organizer / promoter of one paramount industrial co-operative society limited. the case of the petitioner is that the petitioner purchased the lands bearing survey nos.113-part, 106, 111, 105/1 situated at moje bhestan, taluka choryasi, district surat. it is stated that the lands were purchased in auction held on 29-05-1981 and on the basis of the certificate issued by the special recovery officer (auction officer) entries came to be made on 14-05-1982. entry no.971 relates to survey no.113-part; entry no.972 relates to survey no.113-part; entry no.973 relates to survey no.106 and 111; and entry no.974 relates to survey no.105/1. it is further averred by the petitioner that in pursuance of the auction sale the petitioner - society has been handed over possession of the lands by the auction officer on 14-05-1982. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 22 2003 (HC)

Kapilbhai Tansukhlal Sameja and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Jul-22-2003

Reported in : (2003)3GLR2302

d.a. mehta, j.1. this is a petition stated to have been filed under article 226 of the constitution of india. by this petition, the petitioners seek to challenge the order dated 24-8-2001 (annexure-u) passed by the collector, rajkot and order dated 15-9-2001 (annexure-v) passed by the state government granting the disputed lands (stated to be of the petitioners) in favour of respondent no. 5-hansadevi ghanshyamsing jadeja.2. it appears that the father of the petitioners purchased land bearing survey no. 109 admeasuring 6 acres and 9 gunthas and land bearing survey no. 139 admeasuring 9 acres and 23 gunthas situated at village mota mava, taluka dist. rajkot. the father of the petitioners was running a sole proprietorship business in the name and style of mahalaxmi trading company since 1959. the said mahalaxmi trading company incurred huge losses and by 1968-69, it had run up large dues towards sales tax. ultimately, the said concern was closed down. it appears that in 1971-72, the father of the petitioners went to madras for carrying on another business in oil-seeds/groundnut.3. on 21-11-1994 the aforesaid lands bearing survey nos. 109 and 139 were directed to be vested in the government for non-payment of sales tax dues by mahalaxmi trading company by virtue of order of collector, rajkot passed under the provisions of rule 129(4) of the bombay land revenue rules. the petitioners and their father are stated to have returned from madras in 1980 and upon coming to know about .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 19 2003 (HC)

State of Gujarat Vs. Shree SachIn Udhyognagar Sahkari Mandali Ltd.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Sep-19-2003

Reported in : (2004)1GLR381

1. the present group of petitions are filed by the state of gujarat, through its deputy collector, choryasi prant, surat, under article 227 of the constitution of india praying for quashing and setting aside the order dtd. 29.02.1996 passed by the gujarat revenue tribunal in 89 revision applications being ten b.s. 229/93 to 261/93, 317/93 to 345/93, 66/94, 114/94, 249/94 to 263/94, 275/94, 131/95, 132/95 and 151/95 to 157/95, whereby the tribunal has allowed all the aforesaid 89 revision applications filed by the present respondent no.1 i.e. shri sachin udyognagar sahkari mandali ltd., surat, quashing and setting aside the orders of deputy collector, choryasi prant, surat and deputy collector (l.r.), surat.2. it is the case of the petitioner that the respondent no.1 society was formed for the exclusive object and purpose of setting up an industrial township in the area covering the villages sachin, vanz, lapore, popada and bhatia in choryasi taluka of surat district. at the relevant point of time, the areas which the said society sought to develop as an industrial area was in the agricultural zone and the entire lands in the said area were agricultural lands. it is the say of the petitioner that without complying with certain relevant and important statutory requirements as laid down in the bombay tenancy & agricultural lands act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the 'tenancy act'), it was not permissible for the said society to purchase the agricultural land in the said .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //