Gujarat Court March 1992 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.
Shankerbhai C. Baria Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-05-1992
Reported in: (1993)1GLR132
A.N. Divecha, J.1. Is the examination of the applicant under Rule 4 of Order 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('the Code' for brief) an idle formality when neither the opponent nor the Government Pleader chooses to contest the application made by the applicant to sue as an indigent person This is the main question arising in this Appeal from Order challenging the legality and validity of the judgment and order passed by the learned Civil Judge (S.D.) at Bhuj in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 40 of 1979.2. The facts giving rise to this application may be summarised thus: The appellant herein was appointed in the establishment of respondent No. 1 herein as Assistant Purchase Officer by one order of 19th February, 1973 on the monthly pay of Rs. 425/-. On 9th March, 1976 he was on duty upto 1 p.m. and thereafter he submitted a report for half a day's casual leave as he was not feeling well. He extended his casual leave on medical ground upto 13th March, 1976. He reported for du...
Cibatul Ltd. Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-04-1992
Reported in: (1993)109CTR(Guj)438; [1993]201ITR507(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. The petitioner in Spl. C. A. No. 6274 of 1985, is Cibatul Limited. 2. For the assessment was year 1976-77, the Income-tax Officer, by an order dated October 16, 1976, passed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), computed the total income of the petitioner at Rs. 92,54,730 and tax thereon was assessed at Rs. 53,44,670. The petitioner had paid Rs. 67,77,554 as advance tax and tax deducted at source was Rs. 909. Therefore, the sum refundable was worked out at Rs. 14,33,856. Earlier, by an order dated May 29, 1976, passed under section 141A of the Act, the Income-tax Officer had actually refunded Rs. 18,97,404. As the amount actually refunded was more, the Income-tax Officer raised a demand for Rs. 4,63,548. On the refundable sum of Rs. 14,33,856, the petitioner was granted Rs. 14,339 as interest under section 214 of the Act. The net sum payable by the petitioner was determined at Rs. 4,49,209. Against the order of asse...
Nalinchandra Shankerlal Vaidya Vs. the Institute of Company Secretarie ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-04-1992
Reported in: AIR1992Guj140
ORDER1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby the petitioner seeks issuance of a writ of certiorari or a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order quashing and setting aside the decision of the executive committee of the Institute of Company Secretaries of India, an erstwhile company which was registered under the Companies Act, 1956, whereby that Institute had rejected the petitioner's application for enrolment as an Associate Member of that Institute. It may be mentioned at the outset that, that Institute which was a company registered under the Companies Act, has since been dissolved by virtue of Section 31 of the Company Secretaries Act, 1980, which came into force on January 1, 1981, and its place has been taken by Respondent No. 1, the Institute of Company Secretaries of India, which has been constituted under the Company Secretaries Act, 1980. For the sake of convenience, I will ref...
The State of Gujarat Vs. Vir Vasrao Shankarrao Patil
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-04-1992
Reported in: 1992CriLJ2383
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. The appellant State has challenged the acquittal order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at Surat, in Criminal Case No. 5152 of 1982 on 20-9-1983 by filing this appeal Under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Code' for short). The respondent is the original accused who was charged in the Court of Learned' J.M.F.C. for the offence punishable Under Section 30 of the Gujarat Medical Practitioners' Act, 1963 ('Act' for short). According to the prosecution case, on 7-6-1982 one P.S.I. Bhagirathsinh Jashwantsingh had visited the residential premises of accused and carried out the search in presence of panchas. It is a prosecution version that in course of the search, medical case papers containing names of patients and prescriptions written by the accused and bills of medicines purchased by the accused were found. It was further alleged that several scheduled drugs, syringe for giving injection, instruments, usually, kept in dispensary and ...
Bhanjikhan Jahajikhan Malek Vs. Abdulmunir R. Mahesania and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-03-1992
Reported in: (1992)2GLR1569
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. The petitioner who is an original complainant has assailed the order passed below Exh. 8 in Criminal Case No. 32 of 1987 by the learned J.M.F.C. Bajana on 16-9-1987, under the provisions of Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Code for short). A resume of the relevant facts may briefly be stated at this stage.2. The petitioner who is an original complainant filed a criminal complaint against the opponents Nos. 1 to 4 who are original accused persons Nos. 1 to 4, in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bajana for the offences punishable under Sections 170, 341, 342, 347, 348, 350, 504, 120-B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned trial Magistrate was pleased to refer the complaint to Police for Investigation by invoking the provisions of Section 156(3) of the Code.3. Upon the investigation by the Police, charge-sheet was submitted against the opponents Nos. 1 to 4 for various offences and the case was registered as Cr...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›