Gujarat Court January 1981 Judgments
Arvind A. Patel and ors. Vs. Dean, B.J. Medical Collage and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-30-1981
Reported in: (1981)22GLR789
A.N. Surti, J.1. The petitioners, who are students receiving medical education and residing in Hostels, Civil Hospital compound, Ahmedabad, have filed the present petition yesterday for the following reliefs:(1) To issue writ of mandamus or any other order or writ in the nature of mandamus restraining the respondents, their agents and servants from ordering and implementing the eviction of the students staying in the hostels attached to the Medical Colleges in the State of Gujarat.(2) Pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, the respondents their agents and servants be restrained by appropriate order for ordering the students staying in the hostels of the medical colleges in the State of Gujarat to evict the hostels premises,2. To-day an application for amending the petition is given and the following further reliefs are also asked for:(3) To direct the respondents Nos. 1 and 3 to open the Colleges forthwith by appropriate writ order or direction and quash the notice at...
Tag this Judgment!Arvindkumar J. Saheba, Trustee of Karnamukteshwar Mahadev Trust Vs. Co ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-29-1981
Reported in: [1981]131ITR86(Guj)
B.K. Mehta, J.1. The following three questions have been referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad, for our opinion: '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the case of the assessee-trust falls under section 11(1)(b) and not under section 11 (1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the payments made to the two hereditary trustees or pujaris are not remuneration for the services rendered by them and that such payments are nothing but application of the income of the trust 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the payments made to the hereditary trustees or pujaris are not allowable as expenditure ?' 2. These questions arise in the following circumstances: The assessment years with which we are concerned in this reference are 1962-63 and 1963-64, t...
Tag this Judgment!Pratapsinhji N. Desai Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-iii
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-28-1981
Reported in: (1982)22CTR(Guj)233
Mehta, J. 1. We are concerned in this reference with assessment years 1967-68 to 1971-72, the appropriate previous years being Samvat years 2022 to 2026, respectively. This very Bench was concerned with the questions arising in the course of assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67 pertaining to the assessment of Shri Pratapsinhji N. Desai, the present applicant in this reference, who died on November 21, 1978. It would be necessary to refer shortly to the questions which had arisen in the course of assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67, pertaining to the status of Shri Pratapsinhji N. Desai. 2. The question which had arisen in the course of assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67 was in connection with the status of the said Shri Pratapsinhji. The father of the said Pratapsinhji was the ruler or Darbar of the erstwhile State of patdi in Saurashtra. He died in the year 1941, and Pratapsinhji ascended to the gaddi and became the ruler or darbar of the said State of Patdi. He inherited certain i...
Tag this Judgment!Rathwa Mohansinh Chhotubhai Vs. Amarsinghbhai Virayabhai Rathwa and an ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-28-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Guj34; (1982)1GLR307
ORDER1-20. x x x x x x x x 21. (x x x x) It is not disputed that ever since the amendment in that Act the double-member and multi-member constituencies have become a matter of the past. S. 33(2) was there in this very form in those days and Mr.Advocate General with emphasis urged that the text of S. 33(2) was such as would be applicable only to the situation where in a constituency, there were two or more seats, one or more of which was or were reserved for a member of the Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe: He in this connection stressed the word 'any' occurring there. It must be fairly conceded that the word 'any' denotes 'anyone' and when there is reference to one, Ordinarily there would be reference to two or more seats also. When S. 33(2) was there prior to the constitution of the single member constituencies, it was required to be interpreted to mean where in a parliamentary constituency any seat is reserved for a candidate of the Scheduled Caste or Tribe. The member would be r...
Tag this Judgment!Ramniklal Mohanlal Pandit Vs. C.J. Jose and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-28-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ1906; (1981)GLR797
B.J. Divan, C.J. 1. The petitioner herein is the detenu who has been detained in pursuance of an order passed on Dec. 4, 1980 by the Government of Gujarat. The order is passed Under Section 3 Sub-section (1) of the prevention of Blackmarketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (hereinafter called the Act), and it has been stated in the order of detention that, with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of commodity essential to the community, it was necessary in the opinion of the State Government to detain him, and that was the reason why the order of detention was passed. The grounds of detention dated Dec. 6, 1980 were served upon the petitioner in proper manner. In the grounds of detention it has been stated in para. 3 that the petitioner is carrying on business at Rangola in Umrala Taluka of Bhavnagar District and at pipardi village in Shihor Taluka of Bhavnagar District in the name and style of N...
Tag this Judgment!Meeraben P. Desai Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-27-1981
Reported in: [1981]130ITR922(Guj)
Divan, C.J.1. The main grievance of the petitioner in this case is that the draft of the proposed order which the ITO sent under the provisions of s. 144B, sub-s. (1), on March 26, 1980, was not dated or signed so far as the proposed draft order was concerned. The forwarding letter was dated and signed and in the petition itself the prayer which has been made brings out the grievance clearly by mentioning that the draft of the proposed order under s. 144B(1) was neither signed nor dated. The learned Advocate-General who appears for the petitioner contended that since this was not properly authenticated and there was no authenticity about the order which was at this stage the draft of the proposed order, the order itself was non est and, therefore, the subsequent proceedings by the third respondent herein, of passing the final assessment order in terms of that draft order is a nullity and, therefore, the final assessment orders based on the strength of the draft of the proposed order we...
Tag this Judgment!Hargovanbhai J. Patel Vs. Lanva Dudh Utpadak Co-operative Society Ltd. ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-27-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Guj227; (1981)0GLR787
ORDER1. This is a petition filed by one citizen residing at village Lunva of Chansmu Taluka in Mehsana District. The respondents herein are the office-bearers of one co-operative milk society of that village and the respondent No. 10 is the State of Gujarat. The petitioner claims to be a member of the said co-operative society registered under the provisions of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 (the 'Act', for short). The managing committee of the said co-operative society had passed on 15th July 1975 a resolution No. 48 to purchase some 'property for the purposes of the Society by spending about lis. 45,600 to Rs. 50,000 and then by a subsequent resolution No. 53 dated 14th September 1975, they had entered into an agreement to purchase the house of one Shri Virchandas Tanthudas Patel for Rs. 48,000/- and they had paid amounts of Rs. 7,000/- and Rs. 15,000/- respectively on 22nd August 1975 and 17th September 1975 towards the price of the said building. The petitioner, as a ...
Tag this Judgment!Chhotabhai Jethabhai Patel and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Guj ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-22-1981
Reported in: (1981)22CTR(Guj)173; [1982]134ITR201(Guj)
Divan, C.J.1. In this case at the instance of the assessee, the following four questions have been referred to us for our opinion: '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and keeping in view the disclosure petitions of the assessee, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the interest claimed to have been paid in respect of hundi loans which were disclosed by the assessee under the two voluntary disclosure schemes should be disallowed as under: (a) for A.Y. 1962-63 Rs. 5,37,895 (b) for A.Y. 1963-64 Rs. 5,81,989 (c) for A.Y. 1964-65 Rs. 6,29,060 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the commission claimed to have been paid by the assessee to obtain the above hundi loans should be held as disallowable, the commission being Rs. 8,166 for A.Y. 1962-63, Rs. 8,525 for A.Y. 1963-64 and Rs. 10,060 for the assessment year 1964-65 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tri...
Tag this Judgment!Prahladbhai Vithaldas Suthar Vs. the Returning Officer, Modasa Nagar P ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-22-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Guj241; (1981)0GLR969
Thakkar, J. (1) A question with regard to the interpretation of S. 4-A of the Gujarat Municipalities Act of 1963 introduced by way of Gujarat Act No. 20 of 1980 which came into force on October 24, 1980 is raised in this petition. The question is whether on a true interpretation of S. 4-A a Nagar Panchayat would automatically become a Municipal Borough so as to be governed by the Gujarat Municipalities Act of 1963. The question has arisen in the context-of elections to the Modasa Nagar Panchayat. The petitioner, an inhabitant of Modasa, has contended that the population of Modasa was less than 25,000 previously but that it has exceeded 25,000 recently, It is contended that as per Annexure 'A' dated November 25, 1980, which is a certificate issued by the Talati-Cum-Mantri of Modasa, the population is 30,390. In these premises it is contended that it has already become a Municipal Borough having regard to the provisions contained in S. 4-A of the Act and that as a result thereof the Panc...
Tag this Judgment!Bavjibhai Morarbhai Vs. Jagubhai Fakirbhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-22-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Guj193; (1981)0GLR917
ORDER1. This is a petition filed by one Mr. Bavjibhai Morarbhai. An application was filed by this petitioner under Section 84 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act (the 'Act'. in short) before the Assistant Collector. The learned Assistant Collector held that the application under Section 84 of the Act was not competent and so it was liable to be rejected. The Assistant Collector who is also simultaneously an officer exercising jurisdiction under Section 79-A of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 (the 'Code' for short) tried to pass an order of eviction against the opponent on the ground that the land was new tenure land in the hands of the applicant the present Petitioner, and that the opponent could not get into possession. The Assistant Collector, therefore, passed the order of eviction under the code.2. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the Assistant Collector, which is at Annexure 'A' to the petition. The opponent Mr. Jagubhai Fakirbhai who was ordered to be sum...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »