Gujarat Court June 1983 Judgments
State of Gujarat Vs. Motilal Himatlal Shah
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-30-1983
Reported in: (1983)2GLR1404; (1984)1GLR504
A.S. Qureshi, J.1. These two appeals are filed by the State of Gujarat and the Customs Department, Original Complainant, against the judgment and order dated March 17,1979 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Valsad acquitting the accused of the offence alleged to have been committed by him. The accused was charged under Section 135(1). The prosecution case was that the accused had engaged certain persons for carrying silver from Bombay to Daman with the intention to sell it there to some unknown parties who engaged themselves in the export of silver out of India. A total quantity of 287.472 Kg. of silver valued at Rs. 1,60,637/- was seized at Udwada from several persons who were used as carriers of silver to Daman. The accused in his statement to the Investigating Officer of the Customs Department had stated that he was transferring this quantity of silver of a party from Bombay to Daman as he knew that in Daman the silver fetched 20% more price. He also stated that he ...
Tag this Judgment!Ketan Shivkumar Trivedi Vs. Gujarat Higher Secondary Education Board, ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-28-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Guj47; (1983)2GLR1373
ORDER1. The petitioner who had appeared at 12th Standard (Science Stream) examination held by the respondent Board from 2-11-1982 to 9-11-1982 from Jamnagar centre, has filed this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution being aggrieved by the order of penalty passed against him by the respondent Board on 7-3-1983 which is at annexure 'C' to the petition, pursuant to which the result of his examination for Nov. 1982 has been cancelled and he has been prohibited from appearing in Std. 12th examination upto April 1984.2. In order to appreciate the grievance of the petitioner, it is necessary to note a few relevant facts. The petitioner had appeared at 12th Std. examination through Sharda Mandir School at Jamnagar. His seat number was B-02285.He had appeared in all science group papers from 2-11-1982 to 9-11-1982. The result of the examination was declared on 30-12-1982. However, so far as the petitioner was concerned, his result was not declared and was kept reserved. The respondent B...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Miss. Yeraben R. Amin.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-28-1983
Reported in: (1993)115CTR(Guj)120
G. T. NANAVATI, J. :The Tribunal has referred the following question under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 to this Court for its opinion :'Whether the Tribunal, on the facts and the circumstances of the case, is right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to rebate in respect of donation of certain shares of Alembic Glass Industries to Arogyavardhini Society, a charitable institution ?'2. The assessee claimed deduction in respect of the donation of certain shares. The ITO determined the value of this deduction at Rs. 3,218 and allowed 55% relief.3. The CIT, in exercise of his powers under s. 263 of the Act, set aside the said order of assessment and held that the donation made in kind cannot get the benefit of concession.4. The matter was then taken to the Tribunal by the assessee and the Tribunal allowed the appeal holding that the relief could be granted in respect of donation in kind also. The Revenue then moved the Tribunal for referring the abovestated question to this Cou...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat Electricity Board Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-27-1983
Reported in: (1984)1GLR51; (1984)IILLJ370Guj
R.J. Shah, J. 1. In the above petition, the Gujarat Electricity Board has challenged the directions contained in the order dated 15th January, 1979 passed by the second respondent and has prayed that the same be quashed and set aside. State of Gujarat is respondent No. 1 2. According to the petitioner, it is engaged in the business of generation, supply and distribution of electrical energy and for that purpose it has thermal power stations at several places. At the thermal power stations, the work of generation of electricity is done. The petitioner has also got several sub-stations where conversion of high voltage into low voltage is done with the help of transformers and other devices which are installed at such sub-stations. No generation of electricity is done at the sub-stations. The petitioner contends that the sub-stations, whether big or small, are not factories and therefore the provisions of the Factories Act, 1948 cannot apply to the sub-stations. Since the office of the Fa...
Tag this Judgment!Mahmoed Sharif Kasamji Rangawala Vs. Amibai Allabux Rangawala and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-27-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Guj90; (1983)2GLR1481
ORDER1. How to construe the pleadings Can averment$ made by a party in the pleadings be dissected, segregated and then read out of context? Or, should the pleadings be read as a whole to ascertain the true import of the same? Now to gather the intention of the party making certain averments in the pleadings is, in substance, the main question which has arisen in this revision application.2. The opponent-original plaintiffs filed Civil Suit No. 3697 of 1978 on 12-10-1978 In City Civil Court,. Ahmedabad, and prayed for possession of the, suit property situated in Astodia area of Ahmedabad City and for injunction to the effect that the defendant be restrained from interfering with their possession. According to the plaintiffs the suit was based on possession and not on title. The petitioner-defendant appeared in the suit and filed his written statement and thereafter as many as nine issues wore framed by the trial Court on 21-8-1980. One of the issues, i. e., issue 5 was as follows:'Wheth...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Patel Keshavlal Hiralal and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-27-1983
Reported in: (1983)2GLR1094
A.S. Qureshi, J.1. This is a group of four appeals arising out of the same judgment and order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First-Class, Kalol on April 18, 1979 whereby accused No. 1 was convicted for an offence punishable under Section 477A of the Indian Penal Code and accused No. 2 was convicted for offences punishable under Sections 408 & 477-A of the Indian Penal Code.2. Criminal Appeal No. 716/79 is filed by the State against the order of acquittal of accused No. 1 under Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code. Criminal Appeal No. 717/79 is also filed by the State for the' enhancement of sentence awarded to the two accused. Criminal Appeal No. 247/80 is filed by the original accused No. 1 and Criminal Appeal No. 248/80 is filed by the accused No. 2 against the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First-Class, Kalol as stated above.3. As this group of four appeals arises out of a common judgment and as a result of one trial, the learned Addit...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Husseinbhai Abdulbhai ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-26-1983
Reported in: [1987]62CompCas841(Guj)
Bhatt, J.1. This group of appeals is preferred by common opponent No 3, the Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co Ltd. As many as 17 claim applications had come to be filed before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kaira at Nadiad, and they were tried jointly because all of them had arisen out of the same accident that had taken place on February 15, 1976, in the early hours of the morning. The numbers of the claim applications with their respective numbers of the appeals are to be found at annexure 'A' to this judgment. On that day, which was a full moon day of that month, many persons were stranded at the Mehmedabad S T bus stand. They were all bound for Dakore, a holy shrine in Gujarat, for the purpose of having glimpses of the deity there. Judicial notice is to be taken of the fact that there are numerous devotees in Gujarat, who under a vow, take a journey to that holy place for darshan. Those 17 persons were given a lift in truck No GTG 1525 driven by opponent No 1 in the cour...
Tag this Judgment!R.J. Solanki Vs. Gita Transport Co.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-24-1983
Reported in: II(1984)ACC119
N.H. Bhatt, J.1. These appeals arise out of the respective Motor Accident Claim Petition Nos. 149/76,191/76, 212/76, 248/76, 249/77 26/77 & 97/77 decided by the common judgment by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal of Kheda at Nadiad. In these respective claim petitions Rs. 46,000/- Rs. 21,000/-, Rs. 57,000/-, Rs. 25,500/- Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- and Rs. 4,050/- were awarded by the learned Tribunal as compensation. The first six out of these . seven claim petitions were filed by the unfortunate heirs of the victims of the fatal accident whereas the last claim petition being the Claim Petition No 97/77 was filed by Ranchhodbhai Janabhai Solanki, who fortunately survived that mishap. The accident in question had taken place on 30th April 1976 at about 7.45 p.m. in which the Truck bearing No. GTG 1979 driven by the common opponent No. 1 in all those claim petitions and belonging to the common owner the Gita Transport Company, the common opponent No. 2 in those claim petitions, h...
Tag this Judgment!M.B. Risaldar Vs. Deviram Chhitamal and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-23-1983
Reported in: (1984)1GLR228
M.B. Shah, J.1. The Food Inspector, Baroda Municipal Corporation has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 28th February, 1979 in Criminal Appeal No. 49 of 1978 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baroda, wherein he set aside the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class (Municipality), Baroda in Criminal Case No. 4823 of 1977.2. The Judicial Magistrate, First Class (Municipality), Baroda, has convicted respondent No. 1 under Section 7(1) and Section 16(1)(a)(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act by judgment and order dated 26-4-1978 for selling adulterated curd on 20th June, 1977 to the present appellant. The learned Magistrate came to the conclusion that the curd was adulterated and as he sold the curd to the present appellant, he convicted respondent No. 1. Against the said judgment and order respondent No. 1 had preferred the abovesaid Criminal Appeal No. 49 of 1978, wherein the learned Addition...
Tag this Judgment!Vishnuprasad Dabyabhai Brahmbhatt Vs. State and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-21-1983
Reported in: (1983)2GLR1548
S.B. Majmudar, J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner who is the Ex-Sarpanch of Matar Gram Panchayat constituted under the provisions of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has sought intervention of this Court for issuance of a writ of quo warranto or any other suitable writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against respondent No. 7 herein who is the present sitting Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat. The petitioner contends that respondent No. 7 is not entitled to hold the office of the Sarpanch of the said Gram panchayat and that he has a legal and better claim over the same and consequently, respondent No. 7 should be treated to be the usurper of the said office. Other respondents who are State of Gujarat and other statutory functionaries under the Act have been joined in the petition on the allegation that they have not done justice to the petitioner and have not seen to it t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »