Gujarat Court March 1972 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.
Himatlal Govindji Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Gujarat I
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-04-1972
Reported in: [1977]106ITR658(Guj)
P.D. Desai, J.1. The question which arises in this reference is whether a piece or parcel of land of which the assessee is a co-owner is agricultural land within the meaning of section 2(e)(i) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, and, therefore, exempt from assessment to wealth-tax under the said Act. The question has arisen in the course of the assessee's assessment to wealth-tax for assessment years 1963-64 and 1964-65 and is required to be determined in the light of the facts which are set out hereunder. 2. The assessee and his brothers had jointly purchased a plot of land situate on Jamnagar Road within the municipal limits of the city of Rajkot. The assessee had one-half share in the land. After the plot was purchased, two applications were made to the Collector of Rajkot for permission to put the land to non-agricultural use. These applications were made on 12th August, 1958, and 2nd September, 1959. the Collector of Rajkot granted the necessary permission by his order dated 11th Novembe...
Nanalal Girdharlal and anr. Vs. Gulamnabi Jamalbhai Motorwala and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-02-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Guj131; (1972)GLR880
Bhagwati, C.J.1. This revision application preferred under Section 29 Sub-section (2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rent Act') has been placed before us on a reference made by Mr. Justice D. P. Desai. Two Questions have been referred to us. One is, whether some only out of several co-owners of property can effectively determine a tenancv by giving notice to quit and the other is, whether a suit to evict a tenant can be filed by one or more co-owners without joining other co-owners in the suit. Both questions are of frequent occurrence in cases arising under the Rent Act and even under the general law of landlord and tenant, thev have a certain importance and it is, therefore, necessary that theyshould be carefully examined and finally laid at rest by a Full Bench decision of this Court.2. The first question which falls for consideration is whether in a case where a property owned by two or more co-owners is let ou...
Bai Premi and ors. Vs. Thakorbhai and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-02-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Guj200
1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Surat ordering execution proceedings to proceed and appointing Mr. Sunil C. Bhukhanwala as the Commissioner to divide the house as per the terms of the decree.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal briefly stated are as under:--Special civil suit No. 268 of 1947 was field in the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Surat by the minor Thakorbhai alias Ishwarbhai Ichhubhai and four other minors against Bai Devi and others wherein the following reliefs were prayed for by the plaintiff :-- '(A) The properties mentioned at item Nos. 1 to 8 in Schedule B of the plaint may be given to us and the deft. No. 1 to 3; (B) It may be held that after the death of the owners of the properties mentioned at item No . 1 restraining her from disposing the properties or causing the same to be disposed of, and directing her to preserve the properties. (C) The meson profit in respect of item Nos. 1 to 8 in ...
Atmaram Rachhodbhai Vs. GulamhuseIn Gulam MohiyaddIn and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-02-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Guj113; (1972)GLR828
Bhagwati, C.J.1. This is Special Civil Application under Article 227 of the Constitution of has been placed before us on a reference made by the J. B. Mehta, J. two question have been referred to us. One is, whether some only out of several co-trustees can effectively determine a tenancy by giving notice to quire and the other is, whether a suit to evict a tenant can be filed by one of the more co-trustees without joining other co-trusted in the suit. Both questions are of frequent occurrence in the cases arising under the Rent Act and even under the general law of landlord and tenant and it is, therefore, necessary that they be properly considered and the law on the subject should be finally settled by a Full Bench decision of this Court.2. The determination of the two question must depend on the true nature and character of the office of co-trustees. The classic statement of the law describing what is the true mater and character of the office or co-trustees is to be found in the fol...
Mehta Popatlal Bhanushanker Vs. Kashiben Bhanabhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-01-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ1015; (1973)GLR181
ORDERD.A. Desai, J.1. This matter comes before this Court upon a reference made by the learned Sessions Judge. Bhavnagar, under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, recommending that the order made by the learned Judicial Magistrate. First Class, Bhavnagar, on February 22. 1971. in Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. 76 of 1970 be set aside and the learned Judicial Magistrate be directed to hear the objections taken up by the husband in his memo of objection. A few relevant facts may be stated. Bai Kasiben Bhana-bhai, wife of Mehta Popatlal Bhanushanker, made an application, under Section 488 of the Criminal Procedure Code, in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bhavnagar, being Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 52 of 1969, alleging that Mehta Popatlal Bhanushanker was her husband and that he has neglected or refused to maintain her and a direction be given that her husband should pay her an amount of Rs. 40/- per month by way of maintenance. An order to t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›