Gujarat Court November 1980 Judgments
Wood Polymor Ltd. Vs. Billimora Nagar Palika
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-28-1980
Reported in: (1980)2GLR502
S.H. Sheth, J.1. The petitioner is a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, and is engaged in manufacturing laminated sheets. It has got its factory at Billimora. IN order to manufacture laminated sheets, it has been importing paper which is used as one of the raw materials for the manufacture of its product. Billimora Municipality, which is the respondent, charges the petitioner octroi duty on the paper which it imports for the purpose of manufacturing its product. It is charged on the price of the imported paper as well as on the excise duty which the petitioner pays to the manufacturer of that imported commodity.2. It is the case of the petitioner that, after laminated sheets are manufactured, it exports them out of Billimora. The petitioner claims that the Billimora Municipality is unlawfully refusing to refund to it the octroi duty paid by it on imported paper which is used by it as raw material for manufacturing laminated sheets which, in their turn, are expor...
Tag this Judgment!F.M. Kolia Vs. Member, Industrial Tribunal and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-28-1980
Reported in: (1981)22GLR541
S.H. Sheth, J.1. This petition is directed against the award made by the Industrial Court, Gujarat, in Reference No. (1C) 69 of 1980 under Section 73A of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1945, The facts of the case, briefly stated, are as under:2. The Chalthen Kamdar Mandal, the petitioner, served upon the company, respondent No. 2, a notice of change in which they demanded that for the purpose of payment of bonus to the workmen employed by respondent No. 2 company, rentention allowance should be regarded as remuneration or wages. There were conciliation proceedings between the parties which failed. Therefore, reference of the dispute was made to the Industrial Court under Section 73A of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946. The Indstrial Court by its award dated 11th July 1980 held that retention allowance was not a remuneration and that, therefore, it could not be included in the wages for the purpose of payment of bonus under the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. It is that award...
Tag this Judgment!Hiralal Chhotalal Shah Vs. Centeral Bank of India and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-21-1980
Reported in: (1981)22GLR846
S.B. Majmudar, J.1. This appeal is filed by original defendant No. 2 in regular civil suit No. 1552 of 1971 filed in the court of the 3rd Joint Civil Judge (Junior Division) Surat by respondent No. 1 Bank for recovering an amount of Rs. 4337-48 paise against appellant-defendant No. 2 as well: as respondent No. 2 original defendant No. 1.2. The trial court decreed the suit against respondent No. 2 but dismissed it against the appellant-defendant No. 2. The appellate court allowed the appeal of respondent No. 1 plaintiff bank and also passed a decree against the present appellant-original defendant No. 2. That has brought dissatisfied defendant No. 2 to this Court by way of the present second appeal.3. Now, a look at a few relevant facts. Respondent No. 1 is a Banking company registered under the Banking Companies Act, 1913 and it is transferred under the Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings Act, 1969 and it is functioning in the name of Central Bank of India. Respondent No. 1 bank f...
Tag this Judgment!Bhalabhai Devabhai Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-20-1980
Reported in: (1980)2GLR620
S.H. Sheth, J.1. The petitioner applied on 14th December 1978 for a lease of land adjoining survey No. 211 and survey No. 212 of village Bhat in Gandhinagar District. He wanted that lease to be granted under Gujarat Minor Mineral Rules, 1966 in order to enable him to remove sand from Sabarmati river bank. On 27th January 1979 his application was rejected. Two reasons were given in that order. Firstly, the Government had decided to plot out the land and auction it out for granting quarry leases secondly notification under Rule 18(1)(c) of Gujarat Minor Mineral Rules, 1966 was not published.2. The question of issuing notification under Rule 18(1)(c) of Gujarat Minor Mineral Rules, 1966, arose under the following circumstances. One R.M. Patel was granted on 14th March 1973 a lease for one year in respect of a part of the land in question. On the expiry of the period of that lease, it was renewed for one more year. The renewed lease expired on 2nd March 1974. Thereafter it was not renewed....
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Gujarat-iv Vs. Bhausaheb Balasaheb Kadam
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-05-1980
Reported in: [1981]128ITR493(Guj)
Divan, C.J.1. In each of these four reference the same two questions have been referred to us for our opinion, namely : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in setting aside the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner confirming the order of the Wealth-tax Officer made under section 35 of the Wealth-tax Act (2) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that it is a debatable point whether 'stock-in-trade' is or is not covered by the term 'business premises' used in the Explanation to clause (c) of Para. A of the Schedule of rates of wealth-tax and, therefore, it was not an error patent and obvious one capable of certification ?' 2. The facts leading to these four reference are as follows : Assessment years under consideration are assessment years 1966-67, 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70. The assessee is Hindu undivided family and it possesses two buildings at Baroda, namely, Indira Nivas, which is used by it for i...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›