Gujarat Court September 1978 Judgments
State of Gujarat Vs. Sendhaji Mohanji
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-29-1978
Reported in: (1979)1GLR382
M.K. Shah, J.1. This is State's appeal against an order of acquittal passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 2nd Court, Ahmedabad, acquitting the respondent-accused for the offences under Sections 67 and 66(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act ('the Act').2. A few facts may be stated to appreciate the points which arise for consideration in this appeal. On information received, the police raided the place of the accused in Kadia's chawl, Chamanpura, Ahmedabad and from a back room of his house, drums containing a liquid appearing to be liquor were found. Samples were taksn from the said drums in three bottles and after performing the necessary formalities of sealing bottles and affixing slips thereon in the presence of panchas, the samples were sent for analysis to the chemical analyser. The chemical analyser's report showed that the sample bottles contained 'diluted denatured spirit.' The accused was, thereupon, prosecuted for the aforesaid offences punishable under Sections 67 and ...
Tag this Judgment!Khalid Ibrahim Beg and anr. Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-29-1978
Reported in: (1979)1GLR525
B.K. Mehta, J.1. A short but interesting question arises in this revision application as to what are the correct principles which govern the grant or refusal of leave to defend summary suits in context of the amended provisions of Order 37 Rules 1 and 3 of the Civil Procedure Code. The question arises in the following circumstances:The plaintiff-Bank, which is opponent No. 1 before me, filed Summary Suit No. 2672 of 1977 on August 16, 1977 against the petitioners and respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 herein for recovery of Rs. 5,83,028-42 Ps. being the amount due and payable at the foot of the various accounts, viz. Demand Cash Credit (Factory Type); Demand Cash Credit (Machinery Type); Medium Term Loan A/c against machinery and Demand Cash Credit against book debts, which accounts were opened in course of certain facilities provided by the plaintiff-Bank to petitioner No. 2, which was a firm at the relevant time of the suit transactions. The plaintiff-Bank has also prayed for interim injunct...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Ramanlal Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-27-1978
Reported in: (1979)1GLR391
M.K. Shah, J.1. An interesting question with regard to the interpretation of Section 50 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, (hereinafter referred to 'the Act') arises in this criminal revision application which is preferred by the original first informant at whose instance the prosecution was launched against opponents Nos. 2 and 3, that is original accused Nos. 1 and 2 for the offences under Sections 39 and 44 of the Act read with Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code.2. A few facts necessary to decide the point which arises in this revision application may be briefly stated as follows:The complainant who is attached as an electrical inspector with the Ahmedabad Electricity Company Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the company') which is a body incorporate having its head office at Bombay, lodged a complaint alleging that by certain devices and alterations made in the electric fittings connected with the meter recording consumption of electricity which was being supplied to the premis...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-iii Vs. Manu Engineering Works
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-21-1978
Reported in: [1980]122ITR306(Guj)
Divan, C.J.1. In this case, at the instance of the revenue, the following question has been referred to us for our opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the order of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax imposing the penalty under section 271(1)(c) read with section 274(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was without jurisdiction and illegal and in cancelling the same accordingly ?' 2. The facts giving rise to this reference as follows : We are concerned with the assessment year 1970-71. The assessee is a registered partnership firm and is engaged in the business of manufacturing of fans, electric motors, washing machines, etc. In the assessment made by the ITO for the year 1970- 71 under s. 143(3) of the I. T. Act, 1961, an addition of Rs. 21,691 was made by the ITO on the ground that the gross profit disclosed was not acceptable because of certain defects found in the accounts maintained by the a...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-ii Vs. Chudgar Ranchhodlal Jethala ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-21-1978
Reported in: [1979]116ITR56(Guj)
B.K. Mehta, J.1. The following question is referred to us for our opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the amounts collected by the assessee as 'laga receipt' were rightly held to be not includible to its total income under the Act ?' 2. A few facts need be noticed in order to appreciate in proper perspective the contentions urged in respect of the above question. The assessee is a registered firm of six partners having business in cotton with head office at Ahmedabad and branches, amongst various places, at Murkhed within Aurangabad District in Maharashtra. In this branch the assessee used to collect along with the sale price of cotton a sum termed 'laga receipt' at the rate of 8 annas per Rs. 100 of the price of the cotton sold through them. A contention was advanced before the ITO that the amount of laga receipt collected by the assessee was not liable to tax as it was held by way of trust for applicatio...
Tag this Judgment!Pallavi S. Mayor Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-20-1978
Reported in: [1981]127ITR701(Guj)
B.K. Mehta, J.1. The relevant assessment year with which we are concerned in this reference is 1969-70, corresponding to the accounting year ending on March 31, 1968. The assessee derives income from dividend, interest and receipts from a number of trust which are as many as 18, in 4 of which she is the sole beneficiary while in 14 others she happens to be one of the several beneficiaries. The question with which are concerned in this reference is pertaining to trust No. 4 which is known as 'Pallavi Mayor Trust No.4 '. In the said trust, there were some sales of shares which resulted in capital gains. It was contended before the ITO that the capital gains should be assessed in the hands of the trust and not in the hands of the assessee. The ITO, on reading the relevant clauses in the trust deed in question, held that the assessee was entitled to the income from the trust funds for her life. He further found that the trust income could either be given to that assessee or to her mother, ...
Tag this Judgment!Biharilal Nathuram Mali Vs. Hirala Biharilal Mali and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-20-1978
Reported in: (1979)1GLR514
S.H. Sheth, J.1. Plaintiff is the father of defendants 1 and 2. Defendant 3 is the wife of defendant 1. Defendant 4 is the wife of defendant 2. Defendants 5 and 6 are the sons of defendant 1 and grandsons of the plaintiff. Defendants 7 and 8 are the sons of defendant 2 and grandsons of the plaintiff. The dispute in this litigation, therefore, is a purely family dispute.2. The plaintiff has filed the present suit for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with his management of Survey No. 337/1 of Rajpur Deesa and his possession thereof. It is a garden land. For the purposes of jurisdiction, the plaintiff valued the suit at Rs. 15,000/- and instituted it in the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Palanpur. So far as Court-fees were concerned, he paid a sum of Rs. 30/-. The trial Court felt that the valuation of the suit by the plaintiff for the purpose of jurisdiction was not correct. Therefore, the controversy relating to the valuation was argued b...
Tag this Judgment!Virji Lavji Makwana Vs. Partners of Business Running in the Name of Ra ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-12-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Guj178; (1979)0GLR352
Thakkar, J.1. A 'Cauli-flower' remains a 'Cauli-flower' even if you pack it in a box labelled 'roses', and so also, a lease in truth, does not become a license merely by calling it license. This contention of the respondents-defendants having been accepted by the trial court, which dismissed the suit, the unsuccessful plaintiff has preferred the present appeal.2. The appellant instituted a suit for possession of the suit premises consisting of four rooms on the first floor of a newly constructed building from respondents on the premise that the respondents were licensees in respect of these premises as per an agreement of Leave and License, dated May 1, 1970 (Exh. 16) which provided for payment of license fee at the rate of Rs. 50/- per month per room. According to the appellant, as per the agreement there was a stipulation to restore possession on the expiry of eleven months.3. The defence of the respondents was that it was in reality a transaction of lease and the relationship of lan...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India and anr. Vs. K. Mansukhram and Sons
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-08-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Guj176; (1979)0GLR333
ORDER1. This is a revision application by the Union of India against the decree in the sum of Rs. 1583.38 passed against them by the Court of Small Causes, Ahmedabad in the Civil Suit No. 6148 of 1973. The respondent herein is the plaintiff-firm that had filed the aforesaid suit for recovering the amount of Rs. 1,600 by way of compensation on account of the non-delivery of the suit consignment, notice charges and interest on the amount claimed, The plaintiff alleged that one bale of cloth was consigned from Ahmedabad to Buxar on 26-11-71, but the Railway administration did not at all deliver the same to the consignee. The railway on various technical pleas resisted the suit, but the substantial plea that was raised was that the defendants were protected under S. 77B of the Indian Railways Act. The said plea was negative and the decree came to be passed.2. Mr. M, M. Shah, the learned Advocate for the Union of India, owning and representing the Eastern and Western Railways, urged that th...
Tag this Judgment!Dipchand Pyarelal Vs. Thakkar Hasmukhlal Keshavlal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-08-1978
Reported in: (1979)1GLR403
N.H. Bhatt, J.1. This is a revision application by the tenant, who was the defendant in the Civil Suit No. 396 of 1971 of the court of the Civil Judge (J.D.) Baroda. In that suit for possession, an ex parte decree had come to be passed on 13-11-71. The suit was filed for possession on the ground of non-payment of rent, despite a notice of demand issued under Section 12(2) of the Bombay Rent Act. The plaintiff's contention was that he was not duly served with the summons and came to know of the ex parte decree when the bailiff went to his premises with a warrant for possession issued in the execution application No. 167 of 1972 of that court. He, therefore, filed an application under Order 9 Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Code on 19-4-72 and prayed for setting aside the ex parte decree. The said application also came to be dismissed because he and his advocate were absent on 9-12-74. On the following day, namely on 10-12-74, another application was filed for restoration of that earlier a...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »