Gujarat Court March 1985 Judgments
Liladharbhai Khodaji Vaghela Vs. S. Jagdishan and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-29-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Guj59; (1985)2GLR1001
ORDER1. The short but interesting question which arises for my consideration in this Special Civil Application is whether the petitioner who has ceased to be an elected member of the Banaskantha District Panchayat (hereinafter referred to as the 'Panchayat') can continue as President of the Panchayat.2. Under Section 17 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), the term of a panchayat as constituted at its first meeting shall, save as otherwise provided in the Act, be 5 years from the date of such meeting. First meeting of the Panchayat after the election was held on February 28, 1981 and consequently as provided in Section 17, its terms of five years would expire on February 27,1986. On account of death of the person who was holding office of the President, fresh election of the President was held and petitioner was elected as the President of the Panchayat in October 1984, as provided in Section 15(2) of the Act. Petitioner was elected as Member of t...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat Vs. R. Basu and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-29-1985
Reported in: (1985)2GLR800
P.R. Gokulakrishnan, C.J.1. The first respondent in the above group of appeals filed Special Civil Applications for issue of a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondent No. 1 in the Special Civil Application to issue forthwith orders authorising payment of deputation allowance to them as admissible to them from time to time in accordance with two Government Resolutions of 1975 and 1981 and also for further direction to the respondents with whom the first respondents in these appeals were sent on deputation to pay the first respondent herein the amount of deputation pay or allowance as admissible to them from time to time for the relevant period together with interest at 12% per annum and for consequential reliefs. Number of officers in the I.A.S. cadre have filed such an application before this Hon'ble Court.2. The learned single Judge of our High Court has allowed these petitions by directing the app...
Tag this Judgment!M.P. Ramanandi Vs. Gujarat State Warehousing Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-28-1985
Reported in: (1985)2GLR1040
P.R. Gokulakrishnan, C.J.1. The petitioner in this Special Civil Application has come forward with 'this Special Application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing and setting aside the Award and order of the Labour Court at Ahmedabad passed on 28/29 June, 1984, in reference LCA No. 810 of 1977 to the extent that it does not award reinstatement with full backwages and all consequential benefits to the petitioner and also for issuing a writ of mandamus to reinstate the petitioner on his original post with full backwases and with all the consequential benefits as if he has continued in service throughout.2. The short facts of this case are that the petitioner is a workman with the Gujarat State Warehousing Corporation. He was discharged from his service by the respondent as early as 9-3-1977 following Regulation 10 of the Gujarat State Warehousing Corporation Staff Regulations, 1971. The Labour Court which went into this question held that the termination or...
Tag this Judgment!Machine Products (T) Private Limited Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-1985
Reported in: 1986(9)ECC341; 1986(23)ELT426(Guj)
J.P. Desai, J.1. The petitioner is a private limited company engaged in the business of modernisation and renovation of the existing ring frames and inter frames in the textile industry. For the said purpose, the petitioner manufacturers SKF drafting conversion components and for the aforesaid activities of modernisation, the petitioner has also to purchase from open market some of the components which they purchase from the Associated Bearing Company Ltd. The petitioner does not carry on any manufacturing activities whatsoever on the components purchased by them and they are supplied in the same packed condition in which they are received by the petitioner. Excise duty was payable under Item 68 of the First Schedule of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 by the petitioner. The Central Government being empowered to authorise exemption from duty in special cases by sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excises Rules, 1944 issued notifications from time to time laying down certain con...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Yusuf Musa Chandki an ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-26-1985
Reported in: [1987]62CompCas837(Guj); (1985)2GLR272
Ravani, J.1. All these appeals arise out of a common judgment and award passed by the motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Panchmahals at Godhra, decided on September 9, 1981. It is not in dispute that an automobile accident took place on October 29, 1980, while the truck in question was proceeding towards Dohad from Godhra. Five of the injured persons died and 11 other persons who were injured survived. The dependants of the deceased and the injured who survived preferred claim petitions and prayed for compensation. The Tribunal, after hearing the parties and recording evidence, decided in favour of the claimants and directed the respondents, the owner of the vehicle the driver and the insurance company to pay the compensation as mentioned in the award. It may be noted that no one on behalf of the respondents entered the witness box and the evidence led on behalf of the claimants remained practically uncontroverted. The insurance company alone has preferred these appeals. On behalf of the...
Tag this Judgment!BomIn P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-22-1985
Reported in: [1986]160ITR477(Guj)
B.K. Mehta, J. 1. The assessee is a private limited company having the business of manufacturing electric motors. The Income-tax Officer worked out the business loss for the assessment year 1963-64 at Rs. 31,164, but added income from other sources, including Rs. 20,000, which represented, according to him, bogus hundi loans. On appeal by the assessee, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner set aside this order of the Income-tax Officer, by his order dated May 15, 1971, and remanded the matter to the Income-tax Officer for re-examining the question about hundi loans after giving adequate opportunity to the assessee to produce oral as well as documentary evidence, as he may be advised. On remand, the Income-tax Officer passed a fresh order on March 25, 1974. In the fresh assessment which he made pursuant to remand, the Income-tax Officer reduced the addition on account of unexplained hundi loans to Rs. 15,000 comprising three loans of Rs. 5,000 each, said to have been advanced by S/Shri G...
Tag this Judgment!Associated Cement Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-22-1985
Reported in: (1985)2GLR1016
N.H. Bhatt, J.1. These three petitions between common parties by and large raise common or similar questions of law and facts, and they can be conveniently dealt with together and disposed of by this common judgment, obviously with the concurrence of the learned common counsels appearing; in these matters.2. In order to understand what the controversies are. some facts are required to be closely noted. The common petitioner is the Associated Cement Companies Limited, having its cement works at various places in India. One of such factories is known as Dwarka Cement Works and it is situated within the limits of the respondent No. 2 Dwarka Nagar Panchayat which is a body corporate constituted under the provisions of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for brevity's sake). Under the Act, the Respondent-Panchayat is entitled to levy various taxes by virtue of the power conferred on this Panchayat under Section 178 of the Act. The taxes are house tax, octr...
Tag this Judgment!Ahmedabad Advance Mill Co. Vs. Chaturbhai Ranchhodbhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-22-1985
Reported in: (1985)2GLR818
P.R. Gokulakrishnan, C.J.1. This Special Civil Application is to quash and set aside both the orders passed by the Labour Court and the Industrial Court and also to confirm the order of termination passed by the petitioner Mill against the respondent herein.2. The short facts in this case are that the respondent was working in the petitioner Mill for more than 40 years. On 17-3-1980, the petitioner (sic respondent) picked up a quarrel with Bhavsar who is the Supervisor in one of the departments of the Mill and used abusive words against him. Ultimately, a charge-sheet was framed against the respondent and enquiry was conducted. It was found that the respondent used filthy language against the Supervisor and had committed the offence with which he was charged for. The management ultimately dismissed him from service on 22-3-1980.3. When the matter went to the Labour Court, the Labour Court held that the enquiry held by the management was perfect both legally and procedurally and that th...
Tag this Judgment!Billimora Engineering Mart Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-20-1985
Reported in: (1986)53CTR(Guj)370; [1985]156ITR153(Guj)
B.K. Mehta, J.1. At the instance of the assessee, the following two questions have been referred to us for our opinion : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the registration application filed by the assessee was invalid and accordingly it was not entitled to seek registration as prayed for 2. Whether, on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the assessee had not complied with the requirement of law and relevant Rules for getting itself registered under section 185 of the I.T. Act, 1961 ?' 2. A few relevant facts need be noticed in order to appreciate, the rival contentions urged in support and opposition of this reference. 3. The assessment year is 1970-71 and the relevant previous year was ended on March 31, 1970. It should be noted that the assessee-firm commenced its partnership business on September 1, 1969. The partners of the assessee-firm filed an ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-ii Vs. Mehta Transport Company
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-17-1985
Reported in: (1986)50CTR(Guj)242; [1986]160ITR35(Guj)
B.K. Mehta, J. 1. The assessee is a registered partnership firm and the assessment year under consideration is 1972-73. The assessee-firm has a business of road transport for carriage of goods having its head office at Ahmedabad and branch office at Bombay and Surat. The assessee, in the course of the assessment, claimed expenses of Rs. 16,748 spent for construction of loft admeasuring about 300 to 350 sq. feet in their office premises taken on lease at shops Nos. 4, 5, 6 and 7 in Amir Building, in the City of Bombay. The said premises consisted of ground floor admeasuring about 450 sq. feet. It was claimed by the assessee that the loft was required to be put up in order to accommodate 30 members of the administrative staff. 2. The Income-tax Officer was of the opinion that these expenses were in the nature of capital expenditure and, therefore, could not be properly charged to revenue account. The assessee also claimed a sum of Rs. 3,307 as expenses incurred for supplying tea to the c...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »