Gujarat High Court Weekly Round Up: June 20 To June 26, 2022

NOMINAL INDEX Thakarshibhai Bhurabhai Jajal Versus Gujarat State Information Commissioner 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 227 Sadbhav Engineering Limited V/S Ghanshyambhai B Pandya & 1 Other(S) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 228 M/S. Kushal Limited Through Auto. Sign. And Managing Director Mr. Yogesh Ghanshyambhai Patel v. M/S. Tirumala Technocast Private Limited 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 229 Lords Inn Hotels And Developers Ltd. V. Raysons Residency Pvt. Ltd 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 230 Pratapdan Shamaldan Gadhv V/S State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 231 Nileshbhai Narayanbhai Mistry V/S State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 232 Ramilaben Vijaykumar Patel Versus Na 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 233 Anopsinh Harisinh Bhagora V/S State Of Gujarat & 2 Other(S) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 234 Gemalbhai Motibhai Solanki V/S Deputy Executive Engineer 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 235 Darul Ullunarabiyyah Islamiyyah V/S Maulavi Mahmrudul Hasan & 1 Other(S) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 236 Balkrishna Spintex Private Limited versus The New India Assurance Company Limited 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 237 Kirankumar Vanmalidas Panchasara V/S State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 238 Mahendrasinh Himmatsinh Chauhan V/S State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 239 Kajalben Rakeshbhai Bhadiyadra V/S The Registrar, Registration Of Birth And Death 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 240 Madhusudan Gunvantray Pandya Versus Saurashtra University 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 241 Adi Enterprises Versus Union Of India 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 242 ORDERS/JUDGMENTS OF THE WEEK RTI Act | Penalty U/S 20(2) For Destruction Of Information Sought Not Attracted In Absence Of Malafide: Gujarat High Court Case Title: Thakarshibhai Bhurabhai Jajal Versus Gujarat State Information Commissioner Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 227 The Gujarat High Court has held that where any information sought under the Right to Information Act is destroyed and it is not the case of malafide destruction of information, penalty under Section 20(2) of RTI Act shall not be attracted. Section 20 stipulates disciplinary action against a Public Information Officer where information sought is not supplied within the time specified, or is malafidely denied or incorrect information is knowingly given or information is destroyed. S.33C Industrial Disputes Act Is For Execution Of Award, Labour Court Can't Enter Adjudicatory Process To Decide Disputed Facts: Gujarat High Court Case Title: Sadbhav Engineering Limited V/S Ghanshyambhai B Pandya & 1 Other(S) Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 228 The Gujarat High Court has made it clear that Section 33C of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is for the purpose of execution of the award or dealing with the pre-existing right or benefit arising out of the settlement of a workman against his employer. The same does not make way for a Labour Court to enter into an adjudicatory process, giving a finding on disputed facts between the parties. The Bench comprising Justice AY Kogje was hearing a challenge to a Labour Court's order directing the Petitioner-organisation to pay full wages to the respondent-workman from 2006-2013. Dispute Arising Out Of Agreements Relating To Property Used Exclusively In 'Trade & Commerce' Constitutes "Commercial Dispute": Gujarat High Court Case Title: M/S. Kushal Limited Through Auto. Sign. And Managing Director Mr. Yogesh Ghanshyambhai Patel v. M/S. Tirumala Technocast Private Limited Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 229 The Gujarat High Court has held that the acid test to determine whether or not a dispute relating to property is a "commercial dispute" under Commercial Court's Act, 2015 is that the property in question is used "exclusively" in trade or commerce. The Bench comprising Justice NV Anjaria and Justice Samir Dave observed, "Dispute arising out of agreements relating to property used exclusively in trade and commerce would constitute a commercial dispute...a commercial dispute would otherwise not cease to be commercial dispute merely because action involves recovery of immovable property or realisation of money out of immovable property or involve any other relief pertaining to immovable property." Court Can't Decide Disputed Questions Of Facts U/S 11(6) Arbitration Act, Question Of Arbitrability Can Be Examined By Arbitral Tribunal: Gujarat HC Case Title: Lords Inn Hotels And Developers Ltd. V. Raysons Residency Pvt. Ltd Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 230 High Court cannot decide disputed questions of facts in a petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for the appointment of arbitrator, the Gujarat High Court has held. The Bench comprising Chief Justice Aravind Kumar observed, "All these issues including arbitrability can be examined by the Arbitral Tribunal itself." The observation was made while deciding the application preferred by the Petitioner for appointment of sole arbitrator in connection with a dispute...

Gujarat High Court Weekly Round Up: June 20 To June 26, 2022

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags