Gujarat Court December 1991 Judgments
Kalaji Alias Prahladji Keshaji Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-27-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ2397; (1992)1GLR747
B.S. Kapadia, J.1. Criminal Appeal No. 1045 has been filed by the original accused, who is convicted for the offence Under Section 304, Part II of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to six months R.I. and a fine of Rs. 250/- in default, one month R.I., by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Narol by order dated 31st Aug. 82 in Sessions Case No. 35/89.2. The State has filed the appeal Under Section 377 of the Criminal Procedure Code for enhancement of sentence against the said accused.3. The present appellant accused was charged with one another accused Darji Chunilal Jivram for the offence Under Section 304 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation that on 17th Aug. 81 at about 2-30 p.m. at village Hansalpur, Tal. Viramgam, Dist. Ahmedabad, both the accused committed homicide not amounting to murder, causing death of Patel Natwarbhai Kanjibhai of the same village and that the same offence was committed in furtherance of the common intention of both the accused...
Tag this Judgment!B.J. Pandya, Octroi Inspector, Godhra Municipality Vs. Arvindkumar Kan ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-24-1991
Reported in: (1995)2GLR1100
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. 'Whether the learned Magistrate trying the criminal cases under Section 125 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963, involving evasion of large scale public revenue [by way of not paying the octroi duty] by the persons importing goods/vehicles within the Municipal limits, can ever be permitted to short-circuit the cirminal trial, illegally racing to register premature acquittal by enmass disposal of cases on the alleged stock ground of 'complainant being absent when the cases were called out'? This in short, is the question of quite great importance which though suitably discussed and dealt with earlier by this Court in some of its reported judgments, and yet at the same time, since the same has failed to impress upon the subordinate Courts to the desired extent, it is once again felt imperative to deal with the same at further length, in the overall interest of public justice!2. In this group of acquittal appeals numbering as many as 219, involving more or less ident...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. C.A. Shah Vs. Gujarat Cancer and Research Institute
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-20-1991
Reported in: (1992)1GLR687
M.B. Shah, J.1. The questions which require consideration in these petitions are:(1) Whether the respondent-'Gujarat Cancer & Research Institute' is 'State' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India?(2) If it is not a 'State', whether the termination of service of the-'petitioner who was working on a part-time basis as a Head of Gynaecology Department in the Institute and was also rendering service as a part-time Professor in the Institute is legal?(3) Whether the respondent Institute is amenable to writ jurisdiction?2. The last two questions would require consideration of Section 51A of the Gujarat University Act ('the Act' for brief) which provides for termination of service by way of penalty and also termination simpliciter. It would also require consideration whether the appointment of the petitioner was for a temporary period or not. If the appointment of the petitioner is held to be for a temporary period, then Sub-section (2) of Section 51A of the Act would n...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Ambica Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-20-1991
Reported in: (1992)106CTR(Guj)37; [1992]198ITR99(Guj)
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. By this reference, the Income-tax Appellants, Tribunal ('the Tribunal' for short) has refereed to us, for our opinion, the following questions under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act for short) : '1. Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was not entitled to claim weighted deduction under section 35B on Rs. 45,70,837 (exports inspection fees paid in India Rs. 31,520, export freight paid in India Rs. 44,77,604 and foreign travailing expenses Rs. 61,713) 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in lot admitting the additional ground claiming deduction of Rs. 1,88,743 being customs duty payable by the assessee ?' 2. The assessee-company carries on the business of manufacturing textiles, steel tubes, machineries, cylinders and chemicals. During the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1975-76, the assessee had made,...
Tag this Judgment!Mcgax Ravindra Laboratories (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Ta ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-19-1991
Reported in: (1992)106CTR(Guj)24
R.C. Mankad, Actg. C.J.1. The Tribunal has referred to us for opinion the following questions under s. 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') : At the instance of the assessee '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the salary paid to the employee of the appellant for the period during which he was in foreign country should be considered for the purpose of determining the disallowance under sub-s. (5) of s. 40A of the IT Act, 1961 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in confirming the order of the Commissioner(A) holding that the foreign travelling expenses of Rs. 1,579 and Rs. 11,612 were capital expenditure and, therefore, not allowable 3. Whether, on that fact and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law confirming the order of the Commissioner(A) holding that freight charges amounting to Rs. 2,05,575 and exports expenses amo...
Tag this Judgment!Sureshchandra Chandulal Patni Vs. Natwarlal Keshavlal Patni and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-19-1991
Reported in: (1992)1GLR626
D.G. Karia, J.1. The present appeal is preferred against the order dated March 5, 1984 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 5, Ahmedabad, in Criminal Case No. 1908 of 1982 acquitting the accused under Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as the complainant the appellant herein, was absent on that day.2. The appellant herein is the original complainant who lodged the complaint against the accused for defamation under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code alleging that the accused told the complainant on December 13, 1980 at about 3-30 or 4-00 p.m., that the complainant was drunk and was behaving disorderly in public. The complainant, therefore, alleged that the accused by describing the complainant as drunkard, intended to make imputation with a view to cause harm or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will cause harm to the reputation of the complainant and thereby he defamed the complainant. The complainant has, therefore, filed the afo...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat Vs. T.J. Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-19-1991
Reported in: (1992)1GLR567
C.K. Thakker, J.1. This group of 102 petitions is filed by the State of Gujarat against orders passed by the Gujarat Civil Services Tribunal in Appeal Nos. 439 of 1982 and others on October 13, 1983 and also against an order passed in Review Application No. 7 of 1984, on May 31, 1984.2. To appreciate the controversy in question, few facts may now be stated.The respondent in each petition was selected by the Gujarat Public Service Commission (GPSC for short) for the post of Clerk in Secretariat Department and other offices at Ahmedabad. The Recruitment Rules for the purpose of appointment to the post of Clerks in Lower Division of Subordinate Secretariat Service have been framed under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India on June 14, 1966. The relevant rules are Rules 1 and 2 and they read as under:(1) The appointment shall be made either.(a) by direct selection on the result of the Competitive Examination held by Gujarat Public Service Commission;OR(b) by promotion of...
Tag this Judgment!Vasantkumar Durgashankar Joshi Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-18-1991
Reported in: (1993)1GLR113
K.J. Vaidya, J.(Rule. Mr. K. C. Shah, the learned A.P.P. waives service of Rule. Heard Mr. M. C. Barot, the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned APR)1. The petitioner-Vasantkumar Durgashankar Joshi, who came to be arrested in connection with Prohibition C.R. No. 392 of 1991, registered at Umreth Police Station for having been found in possession of 6 gms. of Opium, valued at Rs. 515/-, has by this Misc. Criminal Application moved this Court for getting himself released on bail, challenging the impugned judgment and order dated 7-12-1991 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kaira at Nadiad, rejecting his bail application.2. According to the complainant, P.S.I. M. I. Paiya, on 21-11-1991 when he was in-charge of Umreth Police Station, he received a telephonic message from the Traffic Constable Rajendrasinh Chandusinh to the effect that a driver of one Tempo bearing No. GJ-6-T-4361, who was in habit of taking Opium and was in possession thereof was coming from D...
Tag this Judgment!Amumiyan Pirmiyan Kadri Vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-18-1991
Reported in: (1994)1GLR326
A.N. Divecha, J.1. The Original Plaintiff of Regular Civil Suit No. 705 of 1977 decided by the learned Joint Civil Judge (J.D.) at Junagadh on 1st May, 1978 has preferred this Second Appeal against the judgment and the decree passed by the learned District Judge of Junagadh on 31st March, 1979 in Civil Regular Appeal No. 57 of 1978 and allied appeals. Thereby the lower Appellate Court was pleased to dismissed the appeal and to affirm the judgment and the decree passed by the trial Court dismissing the present Appellant's suit.2. The facts giving rise to this Appeal may be summarised thus:The respondent herein is a statutory Corporation established under the Road Transport Corporations Act, 1950 (the 'Act' for brief), I shall refer to respondent No. 1 as the Corporation for the sake of convenience. The appellant was at the relevant time serving as a Conductor in the Corporation. For the sake of convenience I shall refer to him as the 'delinquent'. He was in charge of one bus bearing No....
Tag this Judgment!Mahendra Mills Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-17-1991
Reported in: 1992(62)ELT495(Guj)
Ravani, J.1. Petitioner No. 1 is a Mill Company and Petitioner No. 2 is the Managing Director thereof. The petitioner Mill Company is engaged in the business of manufacturing both cotton and man-made fabrics. On March 1, 1961, Tariff Item No. 18A was added to the First Schedule to the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 providing for levy of duty on cotton twist, yarn and thread of all sorts. The petitioner company started manufacturing blended yarn with the combination of 67% man-made fibre and 33% cotton fibre in the year 1966. The department levied excise duty considering that the product was falling under Tariff Item No. 18 which pertained to man-made fabrics, filament yarn and cellulosic spun yarn. According to the petitioner company, the blended yarn manufactured by it would not fall either in Tariff Item No. 18 which refers to man-made fabrics, filament yarn and cellulosic spun yarn or in Tariff Item No. 18A which refers to cotton yarn. 2. The First Schedule to the Act was amended ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »