Gujarat Court August 1981 Judgments
Jamnadas Bhaichand Shah and ors. Vs. Bhavnaben Nanubhai and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-06-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ165; (1982)1GLR285
N.H. Bhatt, J.1. By this application, three applicants, the decree-holders of a decree in H. R. P. Suit No. 202 of 1979 of the Court of Small Causes, Ahmedabad passed against the respondent No. 1 Bhavnaben for the recovery of the premises, pray that in the interest of justice, respondent No. 1 Bhavnaben and her husband Nanubhai Mohanlal Banker, respondent No. 2 herein, be suitably dealt with under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, in so far as they had failed to abide by the court's order dated 2-4-1981 and the undertaking filed by them in that regard.2. A few facts require to be stated. After the decree had come to be passed, execution was attempted to be effected. At that stage, present respondent No. 2 Nanubhai, husband of Bhavnaben, obstructed the execution on the ground that he was the tenant of the suit premises and not his wife Bhavnaben. The matter ultimately came to this High Court in Civil Revision Application No. 425 of 1981 filed by respondent No. 2 Nanubh...
Tag this Judgment!Hasumatiben Vs. Ambalal Krishnalal Parikh
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-05-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Guj324; (1982)2GLR346
S.L. Talati, J.1. The petitioner-original decree-holder of Civil Suit No. 1396 of 1975 has filed this petition under the following circumstances :-2. The petitioner obtained a decree in Civil Suit No. 1396 of 1975 and by that decree he became entitled to possession of the premises after 31-8-1978 because the tenant was granted time to vacate the suit premises up to 31-8-1978. The decree-holder thereafter filed an execution petition being Execution Petition No. 361 of 1978 in the Court of Small Causes Judge, Vadodara. Incidentally we may say that that was the Court which had passed the original decree. The defendant raised a contention and his contention was that his original landlord Pranjivan Narottamdas expired and widow Hasumatiben who had filed the execution petition had no right to file the petition without obtaining succession certificate. The second contention which was of some importance was that he had called upon the widow to express condolences on the death of the deceased a...
Tag this Judgment!Apoorva Shantilal (Huf) (Wtr No. 7 of 1980) Arun K. Parikh (Wtr No. 19 ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-05-1981
Reported in: (1982)28CTR(Guj)123; [1982]135ITR182(Guj)
MANKAD J. - Common question which arises for our consideration in these references under s. 27(1) of the W.T. Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), is whether the assessee is entitled to claim the deduction of a loan taken from the Life Insurance Corporation, which is secured on a life insurance policy while computing his net wealth. This question arises in the context of the provision contained in sub-cl. (ii) of cl. (m) of s. 2 of the Act.The assessee in each of these references holds a life insurance policy. He took a loan on the security of a life insurance policy. It was claimed that while computing his net wealth, this loan amount should be deducted from the aggregate value of all his assets. The wealth-tax authorities and the Tribunal negatived this claim, taking the view to the effect that as the debt in question was secured on the property in respect of which wealth-tax was not chargeable, it could not be deducted from the aggregate value of the assets of assessee ...
Tag this Judgment!Shree Digvijay Cement Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-03-1981
Reported in: (1982)26CTR(Guj)184; [1982]138ITR45(Guj)
Mankad, J. 1. In this reference out of the order dated August 16, 1975, of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), seven questions have been referred to us for our opinion at the instance of the assessee. Each question involves separate and distinct facts. It would, therefore, be convenient to deal with each question separately. 2. First question which is referred to us is as follows : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the actual cost of machinery has to be reduced by the amount of compensation for delay in shipment of the machinery received from the suppliers, for the purpose of allowing depreciation and development rebate ?' 3. Facts relating to this question are as follows. The assessee is a public limited company mainly engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of cement and asbestos products. It entered into an agreement with M/s. Revisione Construzione Machine of...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-i Vs. Shree Digvijay Cement Co. Lt ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-03-1981
Reported in: [1983]144ITR532(Guj)
Mankad, J.1. In this reference made at the instance of the REvenue three questions have been referred to us for our opinion under s. 256(1) of the I. T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the ACt'), Each question involves different and distinct set of facts and, therefore, it would be convenient to deal with each question separately. Question No. 1 which is referred to us, read as under : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee wa entitled to relief under section 84/80J of the ACt in respect of the 4th kiln at Sikka for the assessment years 1964-65 and 1970-71?' 2. The facts which are relevant to this question are as follows. The assessee-company was granted a licence for substantial expansion of its establishment at Kikka for manufacture of Portland cement. It was granted licence to set up a 4th Kiln for such expansion. The assessee-company already has three kilns and the fourth kiln was step up for m...
Tag this Judgment!Pravinkumar Lalchand Shah Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-03-1981
Reported in: (1982)1GLR116
V.V. Bedarkar, J.1. During the trial of a criminal case wherein the question of handwriting is involved whether the accused are entitled to the copies of the enlarged photographs from the prosecution under the provisions of section 173(5) and section 207 of the Criminal Procedure Code is the question which is involved in nil these misc. criminal applications.2. The accused, the present applicants, are being prosecuted before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad for the Offences punishable Under Sections 467, 471', etc. of the penal Code. The prosecution relied on the evidence of the handwriting expert because the handwriting expert had given opinion about the handwritings of the accused. At the trial stage the applicants made a request to the Court that because they are not supplied with the enlarged photographs of the disputed and admitted signatures, it would not be possible for them to prepare their defence properly. It was also mentioned that the accused wanted to take help of a ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›