Gujarat Court August 1992 Judgments
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Vs. Pragat Gas Service and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-28-1992
Reported in: (1993)1GLR82
C.K. Thakker, J.1. This appeal is filed against an order passed by the Civil Judge (S.D.), Baroda on July 18, 1987 returning the plaint for presenting it in an appropriate Court.2. To appreciate the controversy in question, few relevant facts may now be stated. The appellant-plaintiff is Indian Oil Corporation Limited ('Corporation' for short). It is a Government Undertaking, having its Registered Office at Bombay. It is carrying on business of refining and marketing petroleum and other allied petroleum products in India. It is also marketing cooking gas, technically known as liquified petroleum gas (LPG) under the trade mark INDANE. This gas is marketed at many places including Baroda and for which distributors and/or dealers were appointed by the Corporation. One of such agreements was entered into by the Corporation with M/s. Pragat Gas Service through its proprietor Mahesh Ambalal Brahmbhatt-defendants in the suit on January 7, 1986. The terms and conditions have been signed by the...
Tag this Judgment!Saurashtra Cement and Chemical Indus. Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-26-1992
Reported in: 1993(42)ECC126; 1995(79)ELT367(Guj); (1993)1GLR5
K.R. Vyas, J. 1. The petitioner-Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Industries Limited is engaged in the business of manufacturing Portland Cement which was a controlled commodity at the relevant point of time. The dispute in the present petition is for the period from 1st October, 1975 to 22nd December, 1975 with regard to Excise duty on packing material, that is, gunny bags. It has challenged the order dated 18th October, 1978 passed by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise Department, Bhavnagar, under Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') confirming the demand for recovering differential duty amounting to Rs. 15,02,721.90 ps. from the petitioner. It is also prayed that the decision of the Assistant Collector and/or the Superintendent of Central Excise and Customs, by which packing charges on cement have been included in the assessable value be set aside. Packing charges on cement have been included in the assessable value be set aside. Packing...
Tag this Judgment!Bhavnagar Chemical Works Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-26-1992
Reported in: II(1993)ACC150; 1993ACJ659; (1993)1GLR310
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. In this appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure ('Code' for short hereinafter), original plaintiff has questioned the legality and validity of the decree passed in Special Civil Suit No. 93 of 1975 by the Civil Judge (S.D.), at Bhavnagar, on 7.5.1977.2. A few material facts leading to the rise of the present appeal may, shortly, be stated at this stage.3. The appellant herein is the original plaintiff and the respondent herein is the original defendant. The parties are herein after referred to as 'the plaintiff and 'the defendant' for convenience sake.4. The plaintiff is a limited company registered under the Indian Companies Act, having its registered office at Vartej, in Bhavnagar District. The plaintiff was the consignee in respect of a consignment of steam coal of grade I, weighing 111 tons, which was booked vide R.R. No. 244386 dated 1.12.1974. The plaintiff had booked the said consignment from Chirrimiri to Vartej, at Bhavnagar, in Gujarat State. T...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. New Bharat Engineering (Jam) P. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-25-1992
Reported in: [1993]203ITR678(Guj)
S.D. Shah, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question No. 1 for the assessment years 1969-70 and 1970-71 and question No. 2 for the assessment years 1971-72 and 1972-73. From the originals papers received from the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, it also transpires that the Tribunal has also referred question No. 3 which is omitted to be excluded in the paper book, and, therefore, the questions referred to us for our reference are as under : For the assessment yeas 1969-70 and 1970-71 : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the income derived by the assessee from letting out part of its factory building to Messrs. Jamnagar Foundry Works at an annual rent of Rs. 12,000 was assessable under the head 'Income from house property' and not as 'Income from other sources' ?' 2. For the assessment years 1971-72 and 1972-73 : '2. Whether, on the facts and in the circum...
Tag this Judgment!Kiritbhai Girdharbhai Patel Vs. Prafulaben Kiritbhai Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-25-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Guj111; I(1993)DMC577; (1992)2GLR1595
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. In this appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ('Act' for short), the appellant/original petitioner No. 1 husband, has questioned the legality and validity of dismissal of the petition for divorce by mutual consent, under Section 13B(1) of the Act, by the learned City Civil Court Judge, on 22-4-1992, in Hindu Marriage Petition No. 34 of 1992. In view of the peculiar circumstances of the case, this matter was fixed urgently for final hearing.2. A few material facts leading to the rise of the present appeal may be, shortly, stated at the outset.The appellant is the original petitioner No. 1-husband and the respondent, herein, is the original petitioner No. 2-wife, who preferred a joint petition under Section 13B(1) of the Act for divorce by mutual consent, contending that -a) they have been living separately for a period of more than one year, and b) they have not been able to live together, and c) they have mutually agreed that marriage should be diss...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. New India Industries Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-24-1992
Reported in: (1992)106CTR(Guj)374; [1993]201ITR208(Guj)
S.D. Shah, J. 1. On being moved under section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Ahmedabad, by four Reference Applications Nos. 523 to 526/Add. of 1976-77, and also being moved by the assessee by Reference Applications Nos. 517 and 518/Ahd. of 1976-77, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following questions at the instance of the Department for our opinion : For the assessment year 1968-69 only : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the payment of bonus and other allowances made by the assessee to its employees each drawing more than Rs. 7,500 as annual salary in excess of 20 per cent. of such salary were not benefit, amenity or perquisite within the meaning of section 40(c)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 196 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. The Appellate Tribunal was right in law, in holding that the loan agreement in question prov...
Tag this Judgment!Kantilal Punjaji Chavda Vs. Nanubhai Kantilal Chavda and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-20-1992
Reported in: II(1993)DMC551; (1992)2GLR1520
A.N. Divecha, J.The husband has invoked to revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Section 397 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (the Cr. P.C. for brief) for questioning the correctness of the judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Court No. 2) of the City Sessions Court at Ahmedabad on 27th March, 1990 in Criminal Revision Application No. 40 of 1990. Thereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has accepted the wife's revisional application against the order passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (Court No. 10) at Ahmedabad keeping her application for interim maintenance along with the main matter. It may be mentioned that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has under his impugned judgment and order awarded interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 400/- per month to the wife.1. The facts giving to this revisional application are not many and not much in dispute. Respondent No. 1 herein preferred one application under Section 125 of the Cr. P...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Karamchand Premchand Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-19-1992
Reported in: (1992)107CTR(Guj)340; [1993]200ITR281(Guj)
S.B. Majmudar, J. 1. The income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred questions for our opinion arising out of its judgment dated March 31, 1977. Some of the questions are referred at the instance of the Revenue and the remaining are referred at the instance of the assessee. The referred questions read as under : At the instance of the Revenue : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the transfer of development rebate reserve to the general reserve would not amount to the utilisation of the development rebate reserve for any of the prohibited purposes under sub-section (3) of section 34 of the Act (2) Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was entitled to development rebate of Rs. 5,61,443 in the year under consideration (3) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in allowing the assessee expenditure of Rs. 27,000 being contribution to the superannuation fund and Rs. 12,...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Ramjisingh Tilakdharisingh
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-19-1992
Reported in: (1992)2GLR1246
S.D. Dave, J.1. This Second Appeal has been directed against the appellate judgment pronounced by the learned District Judge, Valsad at Navsari in Regular Civil Appeal No. 61 of 1979 dated January 22, 1980 confirming the judgment and decree pronounced by the learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Valsad in Regular Civil Suit No. 61 of 1978 decreeing the suit of the plaintiff against the defendant.The substantial question as formulated by this Court runs thus:Whether the sentence is too harsh or not can be decided by this Court?2. Plaintiff Ramjisingh Tilakdharisingh had filed a suit against Union of India represented by General Manager, Western Railway, Bombay, before the learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Valsad, which came to be registered as Regular Civil Suit No. 61 of 1978. The plaintiff had approached the Court against the defendant by urging that he was employed as a Rakshak in Railway Protection Force with effect from March 15, 1957 and thereafter had obtained a gradual promotion and at the rele...
Tag this Judgment!Mohmad Yusuf Salemohmad Meman Vs. District Magistrate and Collector an ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-19-1992
Reported in: (1993)1GLR935
N.J. Pandya, J.1. The petitioner has come before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer that by issuing an appropriate writ or order or direction against the respondent No. 1-The District Magistrate and the Collector of the District of Jamnagar and respondent No. 2-The State of Gujarat, through the Additional Secretary (Spl.), Home Department, Detention Branch, Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar the petitioner may not be detained under the provisions of the Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 ('PASA' for short). By an amendment in the prayer clause para 24(A) of the petition, it was further prayed that the aforesaid two respondents be directed to obey the order of Civil Judge (S.D.), Jamnagar and also that of this Court.2. So far as latter direction is concerned, it is obvious that it is never required to be passed because orders of a competent Court are always required to be obeyed and no directions are necessary in that regard under Article 226 of th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »