Gujarat Court October 1965 Judgments
Parsottamdas Nathubhai Brahmabhat Vs. D.S. Patel and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-30-1965
Reported in: (1966)7GLR443
N.K. Vakil, J.1. The petitioner in this special civil application has inter alia prayed for the issue of an appropriate writ or direction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, for quashing the notice issued by the Returning Officer, opponent No. 1, for the general election to be held for the Mehsana Borough Municipality and further to require the Returning Officer to include the petitioner's name in the list of candidates validly nominated for Ward No. 7 for the said election and to republish the said list.2. The town of Mehsana is a Municipal Borough within the meaning of the relevant provisions of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963 (Gujarat Act No. 34 of 1964). The Collector of Mehsana, the 2nd opponent, by virtue of powers conferred upon him under Rule 7(1) of the Gujarat Municipalities Election Rules, 1964, (hereinafter referred to as the 'afore said rules') issued a notice on 18th June 1965 fixing the various stages of the general election for the Municipal Borough of ...
Tag this Judgment!Govindshram Hotel Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-29-1965
Reported in: [1966]17STC100(Guj)
Bhagwati, J.1. A short question of construction of entry 14 of Schedule A to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, arises on this reference. The applicants carry on business of running a hotel and in the course of such business they serve cooked food and non-alcoholic drinks for consumption in the hotel and they also enter into catering contracts under which they serve cooked food and non-alcoholic drinks at their customers' premises through their servants for consumption there. On 2nd January, 1960, the applicants served through their servants fifty plates of refreshments consisting of pendas, bananas, wafers and tea at a price not exceeding rupee one for each person in pursuance of an order placed by A. V. Parekh Institute for consumption at the premises of the Institute. The applicants then applied to the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax under section 52 for determination of the question whether any tax was payable on the sales of refreshments made to A. V. Parekh Institute. The applicant...
Tag this Judgment!Koli Gator Sura Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-27-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Guj221; 1966CriLJ994; (1966)0GLR357
1. Koli Gator Sura, accused No. 1 and his two brothers Koli Jaga Sura and Koli Khima Sura were tried by the Sessions Judge of Surendranagar on a charge of murder of one Karamshi of village Kora in Taluka Limbli at about 12 noon on 27-7-1963 for an offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. All the accused came to be acquitted in respect of the charge under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code Accused No. 1 was, however, convicted and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. It is against that order of conviction and sentence passed against him that the accused No. 1 alone preferred an appeal. No appeal was filed against the order of acquittal of accused Nos. 2 & 3 in the case.At about 12 noon on 27-7-1963 deceased Rabari Karamshi Gokol was grazing his buffaloas in the padter land of field hearing survey No. 34 of one Bahadur Khoda Bihima Nathu as also Sajan Thaver w...
Tag this Judgment!Krishnadas Vithaldas Sanjanwala Vs. the State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-15-1965
Reported in: (1966)7GLR244
N.M. Miabhoy, J.1. This is a group of twenty-three writ petitions in which a common question of law arises for decision. These petitions challenge the declarations made by the State of Gujarat in exercise of the power conferred upon it by Clause (f) of Explanation to Sub-section (6) of Section 2 of the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act, 1960, (hereafter called 'the Act') in regard to certain lands belonging to petitioners. The lands with which the writ petitions are concerned are situated in three talukas of the State. Four of the writ petitions relate to lands situated in Pardi taluka, nine relate to lands situated in Umbergaon taluka and the remaining ten relate to lands situated in Bulsar taluka. The landholders in two writ petitions had filed statements under Section 10 of the Act and their cases were decided under the provisions of the Act. In regard to the other land-holders, no statements were filed by the land-holders under that section of the Act. This was not done by tho...
Tag this Judgment!Bhogilal Laxmichand Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-15-1965
Reported in: [1966]18STC141(Guj)
Shelat, C.J.1. The assessees at whose instance this reference is made are a firm holding a registration certificate. During the relevant period, i.e., Samvat Year 2017 (from 31st October, 1960, to 8th November, 1961), the assessees entered into certain transactions with four persons to finance purchases of certain motor vehicles from Messrs Prem Nath Motors (P.) Ltd. of New Delhi. In the case of three out of these four transactions, the hirers paid all the instalments under their respective agreements with the assessees and as provided in those agreements exercised thereunder the option to purchase the vehicles. The Sales Tax Officer assessed these three transactions, but not the fourth transaction, as sales of motor vehicles, and both the Assistant Commissioner and the Sales Tax Tribunal in appeals filed against the assessment confirmed the order of assessment. 2. The contentions urged by the assessees before the Tribunal were (1) that these transactions were merely financing agreemen...
Tag this Judgment!Ahmedabad Miscellaneous Industrial Workers' Union Vs. Ahmedabad Electr ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-14-1965
Reported in: (1966)ILLJ727Guj
Acts/Rules/Orders: Bombay Industrial Relations Act - Sections 73A and 119D; Payment of Bonus Ordinance, 1965 - Section 10INTERIM AWARD1. The Ahmedabad Miscellaneous Industrial Workers' Union, Ahmedabad (which would hereinafter be referred to as the union), a representative union for the employees in the electricity industry in the local area of Ahmedabad City, gave a notice of change to the Ahmedabad Electricity Company, Ltd., Ahmedabad (which would hereinafter be referred to as the company), demanding adequate bonus permissible under law for the year 1964-65. As the dispute could not be settled in conciliation, a reference under S. 73A of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act was made by the union to this Court on 28 September, 1965. The union then filed its statement of claims on 5 October, 1965 and also made an application on the same day praying for interim orders, for payment of some bonus subject to adjustment in the amount that may be awarded as a final result of this reference. C...
Tag this Judgment!Amirkhan F. Pathan Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-14-1965
Reported in: (1966)0GLR56; (1965)IILLJ645Guj
Miabhoy, J. 1. Petitioner Amirkhan F. Pathan has filed this writ petition under Arts. 226 and 227 read with Art. 311, Clause (2) of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of or in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing or setting aside the report made and findings recorded by respondent 3 and the show-cause notice, dated 16 December 1961, issued by respondent 2 pursuant to the report and findings and for a writ of prohibition restraining the three respondents from dismissing or taking any other disciplinary action against the petitioner on the basis of the report and the findings. 2. Petitioner was, at the relevant time, a sub-inspector of police. Respondent 1 is the State of Gujarat. The original respondent 2, Sri Nagarwala, was, at the relevant time, Inspector-General of Police, Gujarat State, and he is now represented by his successor, Sri Imdadali. Respondent 3, Sri Shethna, was, at the relevant time, Deputy Inspector-General o...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat Vs. Keshavlal and Sons
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-14-1965
Reported in: [1966]17STC170(Guj)
Shelat, C.J.1. The short question which arises in this reference is whether a sale of 'vatkas' (utensils) of stainless steel would be covered by entry 20 in Schedule E to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. That entry, as it stood at the material time, read as follows :- 'Stainless steel articles (other than those used as parts of industrial machinery or plant).' 2. The question arises out of an application made by the assessee-opponents to the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax under section 52 of the Act by which the assessees desired to have determination on the question as to what would be the rate of tax on the sales of stainless steel utensils purchased from a dealer residing outside the State of Gujarat. The contention of the assessees was that utensils made from stainless steel would not fall under entry 20 but would fall under the residuary entry 22 of Schedule E to the Act. The Deputy Commissioner held that such utensils would fall under entry 20 of Schedule E, observing that the w...
Tag this Judgment!Kanbi Vaghji Savji Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-13-1965
Reported in: AIR1968Guj11; 1968CriLJ54
1. Karamshi Vasara had for sons Arjan, Nathu, Laxman and Jeran, who were living separate from each other. However Karamshi Vasaram with his wife was living with his son Nathu. Since last 4 or 5 years before the day of the incident which took place on 7-7-1963 at the village Kanatalay, Karamshi and one Bai Uji a widow had developed illcit intimacy to the extent that the fact had become the talk of the village. About 8 or 9 months before the incident Bai Uji had left Kanatalay and had gone to stay at the village Nital where she used to work in the fields about 3 or 4 months before the incident Karamshi also had left the village and went to live in Jesar where he had started a shop with one other person. They used to visit each other and sometime after both of them entered in a marriage styled as 'Gharagharna marriage' with the result that Bai Uji left Natal and began to live with Karamshi at Jesar three or four days before 7-7-1963 when the incident took place Karamshi had come to Kanata...
Tag this Judgment!Vishwa and Co. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-13-1965
Reported in: AIR1967Guj19; [1966]17STC581(Guj)
Bhagwati, J.(1) Two questions of law are submitted for our opinion in this reference, one raises the issue as to which is the proper entry of Schedule B to Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 under which fans are liable to be taxed, entry 52 or the residuary entry 80 and the other relates to the validity of the imposition of penalty on the assessee under S. 16(4) of the Act. In order to appreciate the contentions bearing on these questions, it is necessary to state briefly a few facts giving rise to the reference.(2) At all material times the assesse was a registered dealer under the provisions of the Act and carried on business as a dealer in electric fans and sewing machines. In other course of the assessment of the assessee to sales tax for the assessment period 1st April 1957 to 31st march 1958, the question arose whether the sales of electric fans made by the assessee were taxable under Entry 52 of Sch. B or under Entry 80 of Schedule B. The revenue claimed that electric fans were domestic...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »