Gujarat Court November 1968 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.
State of Gujarat Vs. Mukhi Stores
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-11-1968
Reported in: [1969]23STC334(Guj)
Mehta, J.1. The Tribunal has referred the following question to us : 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case penalty under Sub-section (4) of section 16 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953, could be imposed on the opponent for the period for which the payment of dues was excused by the appellate and revisional authority by grant of stay order ?' 2. The short facts which have given rise to this application are :- The opponent, Messrs Mukhi Stores, Ahmedabad, is a firm registered under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1955, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' The Sales Tax Officer had assessed the opponent-firm for the period from 1st April, 1954, to 31st March, 1955, by the assessment order dated 30th March, 1957. In appeal the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax held that the amount of Rs. 17,618-14-0 along with penalty - under section 16(4) should be recovered from the opponent-firm after adjusting the payments made by the opponent-firm according to the provisions of law. W...
Bai Kashiba Wd/O. Baldevdas Hathibhai Vs. Thakor Fulabhai Mathurbhai a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-11-1968
Reported in: (1969)10GLR484
J.B. Mehta, J.1. These three petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution are filed by the landlady who was the widow of one Patel Baldevdas Hathibhai in respect of three S. Nos. 48/1, 48/2 and 50 of Radhavanj village, in Taluka Matar, District Kaira in the possession of different tenants who were held to be deemed purchasers on 1-4-57 and in whose cases the purchase has been determined in proceedings under Section 32G of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. The revenue authorities as well as the Revenue Tribunal held that the respondents-tenants had become deemed purchasers and on that footing purchase price has been determined. It is this finding which is challenged in these petitions. All these three petitions raise common questions of law and facts and they are disposed of by this common order.2. Mr Patel raised three grounds:(1) That the landlady being under a disability there was a postponed date and her tenants could not b...
MahmadhuseIn KurbanhuseIn Mithiborwala Vs. Onali Fidaali and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-06-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Guj334; (1969)GLR925
Mehta, J.1. The petitioner, who was the original opponent No. 1 to the election-petition has challenged the order of the Election Tribunal viz. The Assistant Judge. Panchmahals, dated 22nd March, 1968, dismissing the petitioner's application to treat the list of the voters as conclusive evidence under Section 10(3) of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963. hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', and to desist from further inquiry by recording evidence as regards the age of the twenty-four voters, who have been alleged to be below 21 years of age and were, therefore, alleged to be not qualified to be included in the voters' list.2. Section 9(1) provides for the list of voters. It enacts that the electoral roll of the Gujarat Assembly prepared under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 for the time being in force on such date as the State Government may by general or special order notify in this behalf for such part of the constituency of the Assembly as it included ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›