Gujarat Court July 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.
Swadeshi Industries, Vs. Income-tax Settlement Commission
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-08-1992
Reported in: [1993]199ITR293(Guj)
ORDER UNDER S. 245(1)--Application under s. 245C--Summary rejection without going into merits--Unsustainabile.HELD :Even if AOP might have put forward a claim which was fictitious, the same could not have any adverse impact on the claims for settlement put forward by six firms which were given due registration by the department and whose status was never challenged by the department. May be, their claims for settlement on adjudication may not be found to be valid, wholly or partially. That is a matter of merits. But the Commission could not have made a short work of these applications by rejecting them summarily under s. 245D(1) only on the ground that AOP had put forward a fictitious claim as it itself was an after-thought. Consequently, summary rejection of the applications for settlement by six firms suffers from a patent error of law and jurisdiction and on a total misconception of correct legal and factual position. APPLICATION :Also to current assessment years.Income Tax Act 1961...
L.G. Nagar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. Rajendra Construction ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-07-1992
Reported in: (1993)1GLR420
A.N. Divecha, J.1. The order passed by the learned 4th Joint Civil Judge (S.D.) at Baroda on 23rd January, 1985 in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 155 of 1983 is under challenge in Appeal from Order No. 114 of 1985 and the order passed by the same Judge on the same date in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 156 of 1983 is under challenge in the Appeal from Order No. 115 of 1985. Thereby the trial Court was pleased to reject the application made by the present appellant for setting aside the ex-parte decree passed against it in Special Civil Suit No. 348 of 1981 as well as in Special Civil Suit No. 418 of 1981.2. Since the parties are common in both these appeals and since identical questions of fact and law are found involved, with the consent of the learned Advocates for the parties, I have thought it fit to dispose of both these appeals by this common judgment of mine.3. The facts giving rise to these two appeals move in a narrow compass. The respondent herein filed one Civil Su...
Navkatan Pharmaceutical and Chemical Works and ors. Vs. Ketankumnr Dam ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-06-1992
Reported in: (1993)1GLR558
A.N. Divecha, J.1. The order passed by the learned Civil Judge (S.D.) at Jamnagar on 29th April, 1986 inter alia below the application at Exh. 5 in Special Civil Suit No. 31 of 1986 is under challenge in this Appeal from Order. Thereby the learned trial Judge was pleased to order appointment of a Receiver as prayed for by the respondent in the present case in his application for the purpose.2. The facts giving rise to this Appeal from Order move in a narrow compass. Appellant No. 1 is a partnership firm and appellants Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are some partners therein. It appears that the respondent herein was admitted to partnership benefits in the firm of appellant No. 1 herein. He appears to have filed one suit through his father, that is, the natural guardian for dissolution of the firm represented by appellant No. 1 in this proceeding and for accounts of the partnership business in the Court of the Civil Judge (S.D.) at Jamnagar. It came to be registered as Special Civil Suit No. 31 of 198...
iqbalhusen Adambhai Patel and ors. Vs. District Education Officer and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-03-1992
Reported in: (1993)2GLR1627
N.J. Pandya, J.1. In both the matters a common question relating to Government Resolution issued by the State of Gujarat in its Education Department on 30th July. 1977 (hereinafter referred to as the impugned Resolution) is involved. The petitioners were Teachers under the Erstwhile District School Board. That came to be dissolved after application of Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961 under Section 155 thereof, the effective date being 1-4-1963. I am not much concerned with it except for the provisions contained in Section 155(1)(b) & (e) including two of the provisions of the last mentioned Clause (e) read with it of course, will be the provision of Section 203 of the Panchayat Act and Section 323 whereby general rule making power is provided. Section 203 refers to provisions relating to service, particularly for regulating the services of employees. There are provisions made in that Chapter and there references are made to Sub-section (3) of Section 5.2. Section 203(2) has a provision whe...
Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Jagubhai Jiwabhai Dhandha ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-01-1992
Reported in: (1992)2GLR1241
C.K. Thakker, J.1. These two appeals arise out of a judgment delivered by the Joint District Judge, Rajkot on February 11, 1985 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 67 of 1982.2. To appreciate the controversy in question, few facts may now be stated. Plaintiff-Jagubhai Dhandhal of Regular Civil Suit No. 31 of 1980 was appointed as a Conductor on November 4, 1972 by the Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation-defendant herein. He was a bus conductor in City Bus Service under the control and management of the defendant-Corporation. It is the case of the plaintiff that on July 21, 1978, he was on duty on City Route No. 90 and his bus was checked by the checking staff at Mahmadi Baug bus stop. Three passengers were found without tickets though they had paid fare to the plaintiff. A departmental enquiry was instituted against the plaintiff and it was found at the conclusion of the enquiry that though he had received fare of 0.15 paise each from three passengers, tickets were not issued to them and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›