Gujarat Court December 1978 Judgments
Virbhadrasinhji K. Gohil Vs. R. Rambhadran
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-26-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Guj169; (1979)0GLR823
ORDER1. This petition presents manifestly peculiar method of working going on in some public offices. The petitioner herein challenges by this petition the order Annexure(A) passed by the Collector,Bhavnagar,being dated 25-12-1975.2. A few facts which show Phow the matter has arisen are required to be stated. The petioner is an Ex-ruler of the erstwhile Bhavnagar State and was holding several lands in the villages of Bhavnagar area. The petitioner's say was that he had inherited these lands from his father Shri Krisnakumarsinhji, who died somewhere in the year 1965. One of the properties with the petitioner is the land survey No. 258 known as 'Neelam Baug Palace'. The Palace in that survey number was constructed by the father of the petitioner and the surrounding open land was used for sundry purposes like servants' quarters, garage etc. with the coming into force of the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act, 1960 (Gujarat Act No. 27 of 1961) the petitioner was required to furnish a s...
Tag this Judgment!Ambaben Bavabhai Jadav Vs. V.V. Ramsubarao and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-22-1978
Reported in: (1979)1GLR766
N.H. Bhatt, J.1. This is a petition by a lady citizen, challenging the order, Annexure C, passed by the Collector, Bulsar on 14-5-75, which came to be confirmed by the Special Secretary of the Government of Gujarat by his order, Annexure D, dated 17-11-75 in the revisional proceedings before the Government.2. A few facts require to be stated. There was an agricultural piece of land forming part of Section No. 51/1 situated in the sim of village Dehali of Umbargaon Taluka. The petitioner also owns the adjacent Section No. 48, which is utilised for the purpose of agriculture. For putting up some structures in the parcel of land forming part of Section No. 51/1, the petitioner had sought permission from the Taluka Development Officer, Bulsar. The said permission was for N.A. use. The permission appears to have been sought on 6-4-70 as could be gathered from the Collector's order Annexure C, though the petitioner asserted that the permission was sought for on 31-1-68. For want of any defin...
Tag this Judgment!Master Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dharamdas Hargovandas Mehta and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-21-1978
Reported in: (1979)0GLR964
Divan, C.J. 1. This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order of our learned brother, S. H. Sheth J., in Company Petition No. 19 of 1978. By his judgment and order, our learned brother allowed the petition and directed the present appellant to rectify its register of shareholders by entering therein the name of the second respondent in this appeal as a member of the second respondent in this appeal as a member of the appellant-company in respect of shares held by respondent No. 2 and listed para. 3 of the petition. The appellant-company was to file the notice of rectification with the Registrar of Companies within thirty days from the date of the order in Form No. 21 in App. I to the Companies Act, 1956. The appellant-company was directed to pay the costs of the petition to the respondents herein. Thereafter, the present appeal was filed, and pending the appeal, the operation of the order of the learned judge regarding rectification of the register of shareholders was not re...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat Vs. Narayan Traders
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-21-1978
Reported in: [1979]43STC516(Guj)
Mehta, J.1. A few facts need be noticed in order to appreciate the point involved in the question referred to us by the Gujarat Sales Tax Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax for our opinion under section 61 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. 2. In the course of assessment of the period from 17th January, 1966, to Aso Vad 30 of S. Y. 2022 (corresponding date being 12th November, 1966), the assessee, who is opponent before us, had purchased cotton yarn worth Rs. 46,775 from registered dealers on payment of sales tax of Rs. 924.50 on the said purchases. The assessee then made inter-State sales of such cotton yarn purchased from registered dealers on which the sales tax was paid. The Sales Tax Officer had levied sales tax at the rate of 2 per cent. on the aforesaid inter-State sales under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Central Act') and an amount of Rs. 947.20 was recovered from the assessee...
Tag this Judgment!N.K. Dholakia and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-20-1978
Reported in: (1979)1GLR666
B.J. Divan, C.J.1. All these four Special Civil Applications arise in connection with inter se seniority of promotee Assistants on the staff of the Secretariat of the Government of Gujarat and the challenge is to the same notification and rules. As a matter of fact, the petitioners in Special Civil Application No. 1073 of 1975 are some of the petitioners in Special Civil Application No, 262 of 1975. There are some additional features so far as Special Civil Application No. 791 of 1973 is concerned but the background of facts for all the Special Civil Applications is the same and hence we will dispose of all the four matters by this common judgment.2. We will take up the facts in Special Civil Application No. 1073 of 1975 as they illustrate the questions that arise for our determination. The six petitioners in this Special Civil Application all joined Government service as clerks or typists in the Subordinate Secretariat Service either in Saurashtra, when there was the State of Saurasht...
Tag this Judgment!S.L.M. Maneklal Industries Ltd. Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-18-1978
Reported in: [1982]50STC366(Guj)
Mehta, J.1. At the instance of the assessee, the Gujarat Sales Tax Tribunal has made this reference and the following question has been referred to us for our opinion under section 69 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that timber sizes purchased by the applicant against form 19 were not items of consumable stores, and therefore, the applicant was liable to pay purchase tax under section 16 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969, on the purchases of timber sizes made against declarations in form 19 ?' 2. The reference has been made in the following facts and circumstances : The applicant is a manufacturer of heavy machinery, air-compressor and vacuum pumps. The case of the applicant was that these articles were manufactured as per specifications given by the customers and subject to test of performance to be carried out at the premises of the customers after their erection. During the period of...
Tag this Judgment!Mehta Brothers (Labella) Surat Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-15-1978
Reported in: [1979]43STC208(Guj)
Desai, J.1. The assessee herein is a partnership firm. It is carrying on business of selling cloth, cosmetics, ready-made garments, hosiery, etc. In the assessment year S.Y. 2027, the assessee had purchased artificial silk cloth manufactured outside India from the customs department. The assessee sold the said cloth for a total value of Rs. 15,681. In the course of its assessment proceedings, the assessee raised three contentions : (1) that the goods in question were 'artificial silk fabrics' within the meaning of entry 40 of Schedule I and that, therefore, the sale of those goods was free from all taxes under section 5 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), (2) that the transactions of sale of the goods in question were exempted from the whole of tax under entry 67 of the Schedule to the Government notification dated 29th April, 1970, issued in exercise of the power conferred upon the State Government by section 49(2) of the Act and (3) that, in any...
Tag this Judgment!Prabhat Solvent Extraction Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the State of Gujar ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-15-1978
Reported in: [1982]49STC322(Guj)
Desai, J.1. In this reference made by the Gujarat Sales Tax Tribunal (hereinafter called the 'Tribunal') at the instance of the assessee under section 69 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the following four questions of law have been referred to this Court : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that as there was consignment of 50 per cent of manufactured goods and in absence of identifications, the applicant was liable to pay purchase tax under section 16 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969, in respect of 50 per cent of the purchases of soyabean oil made against certificates in form 19 by considering that there was a breach of recitals of such certificates on pro rata basis (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the applicant was liable to penalty under section 45(1) of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969, in respect of...
Tag this Judgment!Bank of Baroda Vs. Workmen
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-14-1978
Reported in: [1979(39)FLR153]; (1979)GLR335; (1979)IILLJ57Guj
Divan, C.J.1. Both these Special Civil Applications challenge the same award of the Industrial Tribunal, being the award dated July, 15, 1978, and we will dispose of both these matters by this common judgment. 2. Special Civil Application No. 2129 of 1978 is filed by the management of Bank of Baroda. The first respondent are the workmen of Bank of Baroda and notice of this petition is required to be served on K. R. Mehta, Executive Member of the All India Bank of Baroda Employees Union. The second respondent is Valiben, widow of Shamjibhai Sinduria, residing at Saiyadpura, Surat. Special Civil Application No. 2504 of 1978 is filed by Valiben, widow of Shamjibhai Sinduria, and respondent No. 1 is the Presiding Officer of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal. The second respondent is the Regional Manager of Bank of Baroda and the third respondent is K. R. Mehta. 3. The facts leading to this litigation are as follows : On April 13, 1976, the management of Bank of Baroda terminated t...
Tag this Judgment!J.M. Parmar Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-14-1978
Reported in: (1979)1GLR835
N.H. Bhatt, J.1. This is a petition by a Circle Police Inspector in the States's service, challenging the order of his suspension passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Baroda Range on 30-11-78. The challenge is on four grounds, one of which is that the Deputy Inspector General of Police had no authority at law to pass the impugned order. The three other grounds that were alleged were that the order was made without making a preliminary enquiry and without there being any material before the said authority to arrive at a satisfaction about there being a prima facie case for suspension and the satisfaction spoken to by the Deputy Inspector General of Police in his affidavit-in-reply was only a camouflage to shield the true character of the order, which was passed because of the announcement made by the Home Minister of the State of Gujarat. The third ground was that the order was passed against the guidelines issued by the Government under their circular dated 8-7-70 and that...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »