Gujarat Court December 1987 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Echjay Industries Pvt. Ltd Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-31-1987
Reported in: 1988(15)ECC272
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. Petitioner No. 1 is a private limited company; and petitioner No. 2 is its director. Since 1971, the petitioner-company manufactures certain items and roughly shaped pieces by forging of iron and steel. The petitioners challenge in this petition, the order passed by the Assistant Collector on the classification list dated March 9, 1987; and have prayed for other consequential reliefs. 2. With respect to the items manufactured by them, the petitioners have been filing classification lists from time to time; and the Assistant Collector of Customs and Central Excise and the Superintendent of Central Excise, respondents Nos. 3 and 4 respectively and their predecessors-in-office have been approving the same. Certain items manufactured by them are subject to payment of central excise duty and certain items manufactured by them are totally exempted from the payment of such duty. Steal forgings manufactured by the petitioners are as per customer's forging drawing and proof-...
Gujarat University Vs. Chetan N. Savla
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-30-1987
Reported in: (1988)1GLR354
P.R. Gokulakrishnan, C.J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal is against the order passed by the learned single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 5528 of 1987. This is a case in which a student, who is a gold medalist, is declared as failed and has been debarred for a period of one year for the alleged offence of allowing his paper to be copied by the student sitting behind him in the examination hall. This is the examination for Second B. Com. held at May-June, 1987. The respondent was sitting ahead of the candidate who is alleged to have copied and there is a statement of the Observer to the effect that the candidate who has the Number 6384 was found copying the question No. 2(a). Examination Number of the respondent is 6383. The learned single Judge, after elaborately discussing the materials on record, observed that the only evidence against the respondent is the belief or inference of the Observer, based on the manner in which the respondent was sitting and allowing one Hina to copy...
Narsing N. Gamit Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-28-1987
Reported in: (1988)2GLR1268
M.B. Shah, J.1. The petitioner was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code by the Additional Sessions Judge, Surat, on 31st July, 1984. He was entitled to have furlough on 31st July, 1986. However, the I.G., Prisons, has not granted it. Hence the petitioner filed Special Criminal Application No. 1142 of 1987. That application was disposed of by our order dated 6-11-1987 wherein we directed the I.G., Prisons, to decide the prayer of the petitioner by taking into consideration the fact that if the petitioner is released on furlough, he would stay at village Advana, taluka Porbandar, district Junagadh, and would not go to village Sandhkuva, taluka Songadh, district Surat, where the offence took place.2. Inspite of the aforesaid observation, the I.G., Prisons, has not taken into consideration the facts stated in our order and has not granted the petitioner's furlough. Mr. Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, was not in a position to point out...
Ravi Construction Company Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-24-1987
Reported in: [1988]173ITR674(Guj)
Ahmadi, J.1. The petitioner, a partnership firm, challenges the rejection of the petitioner's returns filed under the Amnesty Scheme and certain other incidental orders passed in that behalf. We propose to confine ourselves to the relief claimed in paragraph 28(B) of the petition, namely, that the orders passed by the Income-tax Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, dated April 14, 1987, and October 16, 1987, be quashed and the petitioner's appeal be restored to file and in the meantime the prosecution launched against the petitioner be stayed. Learned counsel for the parties have also addressed us on this limited question and, therefore, we are not required to set out the averments made in the petition in support of the other reliefs sought in paragraph 28 of the petition. The facts relevant for the disposal of the limited question are as under : The petitioner made an application under the Amnesty Scheme to the Commissioner of Income-tax and paid the tax as per the said scheme. The petitioner t...
Miss Jayshree J. Solanki Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-24-1987
Reported in: (1988)1GLR424
P.R. Gokulakrishnan, C.J.1. This Special Civil Application is for issuing a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ setting aside the decision of respondent No. 2 declaring the petitioner unsuccessful on the ground of not holding the requisite educational qualification on the date of advertisement and for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the authorities to place her name at the appropriate place in the list of successful candidates prepared by the 2nd respondent for appointment to the post of Assistants in the Secretariat of the Government of Gujarat. It is further prayed for issue of a writ of mandamus declaring Rule 9 of Gujarat Secretariat Assistant, Deputy Mamlatdar and Sales Tax Inspectors Recruitment (Examination) Rules, 1979 as ultra vires Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India with a direction for deletion of the said Rules. Further directions prayed for are to issue a direction to appoint the petitioner to the post of Assistant in Super Division of Subordin...
State of Gujarat Vs. Nareshbhai @ Naranbhai Jivanjibhai Harijan and or ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-22-1987
Reported in: (1988)2GLR925
M.B. Shah, J.1. In Sessions Case No. 6 of 1987 before the City Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad respondent No. 1-Nareshbhai was charged for the offences punishable under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 380 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code. Respondent No. 2-Kalpanaben, the daughter of the complainant, was charged for the offence punishable under Section 380 of the Indian Penal Code. Respondent No. 3-Ramniklal is the goldsmith who had purchased the stolen ornaments. He was not charged for any offence before the trial Court but he is joined as a party-respondent as the learned Sessions Judge has ordered that muddamal article No. 1 which is the golden ingot be handed over to him as he has purchased it bona fide by paying full market price to respondent No. 1 Naresh. By the judgment and order dated 9th February, 1987 the learned Sessions Judge had convicted the respondent No. 2 for the offence punishable under Section 380 of the Indian Penal Code but had acquitted th...
Mehsana District Co-operative Sales and Purchase Union Ltd. and anr. V ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-21-1987
Reported in: (1988)2GLR1060
A.M. Ahmadi, J.1. These two petitions raise common questions. The latter petition is a more comprehensive one as it covers all the three constituencies unlike the first petition which covers only the Cooperative Marketing Societies Constituency. The facts in both the petitions being identical, it would suffice if we briefly state the facts of the second petition which were relied upon by Counsel at the hearing of these two petitions.2. The Gujarat Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1963 (Gujarat Act No. XX of 1964), hereinafter called 'the Act', was enacted inter alia for the establishme at of markets for agricultural produce in the State of Gujarat. Section 9 provides for the establishment of a market committee for every market area declared as such under Section 6 of the Act. By virtue of Section 10, every market committee is a body corporate. Section 11 provides for the constitution of the market committee. It lays down that every market committee shall consist of the following membe...
Mangalsingh Bhansingh Rathod Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-17-1987
Reported in: 1989CriLJ460; (1988)2GLR1028
ORDERR.A. Mehta, J.1. This is a bail application in respect of an offence under The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 985 grams of brown sugar valued at Rs, 59,100/- is the subject matter of the offence. On 23-9-1987, the Preventive Officer of Central Excise, Headquarters Office, Ahmedabad had received an information to the effect that accused No. 1 Bharatji was to deliver brown sugar to accused No. 2 Bansi G. Chauhan at about 1-00 O'clock. As a result of this information, there were watch, search and seizure and the quantity of 985 grams of foreign brown sugar valued at Rs. 59,100/- was seized under a Panchanama.2. The accused No. 3, the present petitioner was not present and was not shown to be involved in the offence. However, it appears from the statements of accused Nos. 1 and 2 that this narcotic drug i.e. brown sugar was supplied by the present petitioner-accused No. 3 about a week before its seizure and was given for disposal and preservation. The statements...
R.S. Jagtap Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-15-1987
Reported in: (1988)1GLR429
J.P. Desai, J.1. The petitioner was given charge-sheet on 10-2-1986 in connection with some alleged mis-conduct of June, 1984. The Inquiry Officer submitted report on 31-7-1987 and thereafter on 9-11-1987, the respondent No. 2 director General of Police, Gujarat State issued notice to the petitioner to show-cause why he should not be dismissed from service and at the same time passed the order placing the petitioner under suspension. Being aggrieved with the order of suspension, the petitioner has filed this petition. The petition has been admitted by this Court and at that time, the ad-interim relief was granted in terms of para 18(B) and 18(C). The petitioner, in pursuance of the aforesaid interim order, has been reinstated in the service and he is now in active service.2. The petitioner was not placed under suspension at the time of giving charge-sheet to him in the month of Feb. 1986. Even after the receipt of the report of the Inquiry Officer in the month of July, 1987, the Direct...
Salim Rajmahmad Pathan Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-15-1987
Reported in: (1988)2GLR886
A.P. Ravani, J.1. On being satisfied that the petitioner's activity was prejudicial to the maintenance of public order in the area of Surat City, the Commissioner of Police, Surat, passed an order of detention dated June 11, 1987 under the provisions of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). From the grounds of detention served upon the detenu it appears that the Sponsoring Authority placed material before the Police Commissioner, Surat. The material placed before him disclosed that the petitioner was running liquor dens at Udhna Road No. 2 and at 'Gala Ghanti' locality of Surat City. That he was engaging servants to run the dens and that the prohibited liquor was being openly sold in public places. That people used to purchase the prohibited liquor from these places and consume the same on public road. On account of this situation it became difficult for female folks to pass through that locality and the people who consumed l...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »