Gujarat Court November 1962 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Collector of Sales Tax, Bombay State, Bombay Vs. Abdul Rehman Alladin
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-30-1962
Reported in: (1963)0GLR615; [1963]14STC803(Guj)
K.T. Desai, C.J.1. This is a reference under section 34(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953. The business of Messrs Abdul Rehman Alladin, the respondents herein, consisted of purchasing old motor-cars and dismantling the same and deriving spare parts therefrom and parts which could not be used as spare parts and of selling the spare parts without moulding, repairing or changing them in any way. The respondents also sold old motor-cars and scrap. The respondents applied for registration on 11th July, 1955, as by that date, according to them their turnover had exceeded Rs. 25,000. The Sales Tax Officer in his order dated 11th July, 1955, took the view that the respondents were liable as dealers who processed goods with effect from 1st April when their turnover was taken to have exceeded Rs. 10,000. The matter went in appeal before the Assistant Collector of Sales Tax who set aside the assessment by his order dated 9th July, 1956. Thereafter the Additional Collector of Sales Tax in exerc...
The Collector of Sales-tax, Bombay Vs. Abdul Rehman Alladin
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-30-1962
Reported in: AIR1964Guj27
K.T. Desai, C. J. 1. This is a Reference under Section 34(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953. The business of Messrs. Abdul Rehman Alladin, the respondents herein, consisted of purchasing old motor-cars and dismantling the same and deriving spare parts therefrom and parts which could not be used as spare parts and of selling the spare parts without moulding, repairing or changing them in any way. The respondents also sold motor-cars and scrap. The respondents applied for registration on 11th July 1955 as by that date, according to them their turnover had exceeded Rs. 25,000/- the Sales Tax Officer by his order dated 11th July 1955 took the view that the respondents were liable as dealers who processed goods with effect from 1st April 1954 when their turnover was taken to have exceeded Rs. 10.000/- the matter went in appeal before the Assistant Collector of sales Tax who set aside the assessment by His order dated 9th July 1356. Thereafter the Additional Collector of Sales tax in exer...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Moosa Haji Ahmed and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-26-1962
Reported in: [1964]52ITR147(Guj)
Desai, C.J. 1. This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat. The assessees in this case are the trustees of Haji Ahmed Haji Abdul Kadar Moosa Wakf Fund. The assessment years with which we are concerned are the years 1954-55 to 1958-59, the relevant accounting periods being the years ending 31st March, 1954, to 31st March, 1958. The deed of wakf, which is required to be considered in this case, is dated 6th July, 1953. The deed is in Gujarati language. The English translation of that deed, which is annexed as annexure 'A' to the reference paper-book, does not correctly translate the relevant provisions contained in the deed of wakf. The relevant portion of the translation set out in the statement of the case does not bring out the true effect of the original clause in Gujarati. Clause 7 of that deed of wakf provides that the surplus out of the income of the wakf shall be utilised by the trustees fo...
Dhrangadhra Trading Co. Private Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, G ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-26-1962
Reported in: (1963)0GLR785
K.T. Desai, C.J.1. This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, at the instance of the assessee. The assessee is a private limited company. The assessment years with which we are concerned are the years 1950-51, 1951-52, 1952-53, 1953-54, the accounting years being the years ending 31st March, 1950, 31st March, 1951, 31st March, 1952, and 31st March, 1953, respectively. At all material times, the assessee company had its registered officer at Dhrangadhra in Saurashtra and was carrying on business at Dhrangadhra. The first assessment on the assessee company under the Income-tax Act, 1922 was made for the assessment year 1950-51. The Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, was extended to Part B States from 1st April, 1950. The question involved relates to the construction of the provisions contained in section 14(2)(c) of the Indian Income-tax Act. Section 14(2)(c) as it stood on 1st April, 1950, before the amendment made therein by the Indian Income-tax (Amendment) ...
Savitaben Vs. Dalal Ramanlal Vrindavandas and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-26-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Guj147
ORDERV.B. Raju, J.1. In this revision application an order of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Umreth, rejecting the document, Ex. 15/1, as inadmissible in evidence is challenged. The learned Judge was inquiring into a claim under Order 21, Rule 58, C. P. Code in respect of property, which had been attached in 1958. The applicant put forth her claim to the same property under a will and also under Ex. 15/1. Ex. 15/1 was executed in favour of Dave Mayaram and the alleged will was executed in favour of the applicant by Dave Mayatam. In order to show that the testator had authority to make a wilt in her favour, the claimant relied on Ex. 15/1 to show that the testator had right to the properly in respect of which he was making a will. The learned Judge, however, thought that Ex. 15/1 was a deed of relinquishment of the right over property valued at more than Rs. 1,000/- and he thought that the document was therefore Inadmissible- in evidence.2. If we look at the document, It is clear tha...
Zandaram Joitaram and anr. Vs. Prahladrao Vithalrao
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-22-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Guj160; (1963)0GLR587
ORDERV.B. Raju, J.1. The opponent filed a suit, being Suit No. 1147 of 1951, for a declaration that he was a lawful sub-tenant of the defendants and for a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from disturbing the plaintiff's possession of a cabin. An interim injunction was granted but was vacated, it was vacated on the ground that the plaintiff did not make out a prima facie case to show that he ever occupied the suit premises as the defendants' tenant. After the temporary injunction was vacated, it appears that the cabin was removed by the defendants. Against the order vacating the temporary injunction, an appeal was filed and in appeal the learned Assistant Judge, Ahmedabad, ordered that In the interests of justice an injunction should be issued against the respondents that they should not obstruct the appellant-plaintitf in occupying the said 'Ota' or putting up a cabin on the said 'Ota'. A prayer for a mandatory injunction which was also made in the appeal was not pressed...
Sarapalli Tayaballi Vs. the Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmed ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-21-1962
Reported in: (1964)5GLR550
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This second appeal raises a short but interesting question of law relating to the construction of Section 224 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The facts giving rise to the litigation are few and may be briefly stated as follows.2. The plaintiff is the owner of certain land bearing survey No. 978 and situate in Raikhad Ward Ahmedabad. The land consists of a strip between two opposite rows of houses and connects at its ends two Mohallas known as Vahorwad and Khatriwad. The land is used for the purpose of passage by the occupants of the houses abutting on the land for the last over 25 years. The land is a private street within the meaning of Section 2(47) of the Act. At one time the plaintiff contended that the land is not a private street but this contention was negatived by both the lower Courts and the plaintiff has now argued this Second Appeal before me on the footing that the land is a private street s...
New Prajapat Tiles Company and anr. Vs. Derasari Labhshanker Himatlal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-20-1962
Reported in: [1964(8)FLR392]; (1964)0GLR265
1. This revision application is by the original defendants. The opponent had filed a suit in the Court of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Morvi, alleging that he was an employee of the applicants, that there was a contract of employment between him and the applicants to employ him for two years and his employment had been terminated after about one month and therefore he was entitled to Rs. 2,160. According to the plaintiff, he was entitled to this sum by way of damages for breach of contract and also because his employment was terminated without hearing him and without notice to him. He also claimed Rs. 180 by way of leave salary to which he was entitled if he had served the applicants for two years. 2. A preliminary issue was raised as to whether the civil Court had jurisdiction to try such a suit and this issue was decided in the affirmative. Hence the revision application. It is contended in revision that such a suit should go to the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act and i...
A Partnership Firm Running in the Name of New Prajapat Tiles Co. and a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-20-1962
Reported in: AIR1964Guj22; (1964)10GLR265
ORDERV.B. Raju, J.1. This revision application is by the original defendants. The opponent had tiled a suit in the Court of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Morvi, alleging that he was an employee of the applicants, that there was a contract of employment between him and the applicants to employ him for two years and his employment had been terminated after about one month and therefore he was entitled to Rs. 2150/- According to the plaintiff, he was entitled to this sum by way of damages for breach of contract and also because his employment was terminated without hearing him and without notice to him. He also claimed Rs. 180/- by way of leave salary to which he was entitled if he had served the applicants for two years. 2. A preliminary issue was raised as to whether the Civil Court had jurisdiction to try such a suit and this issue was decided in the affirmative. Hence this revision application. It is contended in revision that such a suit should go to the authority under the Payme...
Chandrika Chinubhai Patel and anr. Vs. the State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-16-1962
Reported in: 1963CriLJ214; (1963)GLR872
ORDERV.B. Raju, J.1. In this revision application what is challenged is an order passed by the Chief City Magistrate, Ahmedabad, cancelling an order for maintenance to be paid to opponent (Applicant ?) No. i Chandrika with effect from the date of her attaining majority. The order also suspended the payment of maintenance to one Rajnikant, the son of opponent No. i on the ground that he was a child staying with his father, opponent No. 1.2. Regarding Chandrika, the daughter of opponent No. 1, the learned Magistrate held that as she attained majority, the order for payment of maintenance should cease on her attaining majority. The learned Magistrate did not follow the ruling in Shaikh Ahmed v. Bai Fatma, ILR (1943) Bom 38 : AIR 1943 Bom 48. It is true that in Section 488, Cri. Pro. Code, the word 'child' is used, but' 'the word 'child' is not defined as a minor. As observed in State v. Ishwarlal, AIR 1950 Nag 231, a child must be unable to maintain, itself. The age of the child is not ve...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »