Gujarat Court January 1995 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.
State of Gujarat Vs. Bombay Novelty and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-19-1995
Reported in: (1996)1GLR143
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. In this appeal under Section 397 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('Code' for short), the appellant-State has challenged the quantum of punishment in impugned order of sentence passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad City, in Criminal Case No. 274 of 1986, on 10th October 1986.2. The respondents are the original accused. Respondent No. 1 is the proprietory firm and respondent No. 2 is a proprietor who is doing business in the name and style of 'M/s. Bombay Novelty', at Ahmedabad. The respondents were tried in the trial Court in the aforesaid criminal case for the offence punishable under Sections 18(1)(i) and 18(c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 ('Act' for short). Both the accused persons had pleaded guilty to the charges before the trial Court and they came to be convicted for the said offences. Therefore, both the accused are ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 250/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for one ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Somnath Oil Mills
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-18-1995
Reported in: [1995]214ITR32(Guj)
M.B. Shah, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B', Ahmedabad, has referred the following questions under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for our opinion : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that levy of penalty as imposed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner under section 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained 2. Whether the finding of the Appellate Tribunal that levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, cannot be sustained is correct in law and sustainable from the facts, evidence and material on record ?' 2. The aforesaid questions arise in the background of the facts : The assessee, Messrs. Somnath Oil Mills, Veraval, which is a registered firm, carries on the business of running an oil mill. On January 6, 1972, the sales tax authorities conducted a raid in the premises of the assessee and during the ...
State of Gujarat Vs. Mafatlal Nathubhai Nayak
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-17-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ288; (1996)1GLR596
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. This appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('the Code' for short) is directed against the order of acquittal passed by the learned Chief J.M.F.C. Mehsana in chief case No. 34 of 1983 passed on 30-7-1988.2. In order to appreciate the merits of this appeal, a few relevant and material facts may be stated first.3. The prosecution case is that the respondent who is the original accused was working as an Honorary Secretary of the Mehsana Telephone Engineering Division Employees' Co-operative Society, Mehsana at the relevant time during the period 1980-81. He was writing accounts and was in charge of the account books and the record of the said society. He had misappropriated a total amount of Rs. 52602.50 with an intention to use the said amount for himself. He had misappropriated the aforesaid amount of the members of the said society. It is also alleged that the accused had also fabricated the documents, wrote false accounts and had misappropria...
Babulal Shamrao Joshi Vs. Manubhai C. Bhatt and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-16-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Guj193; (1995)1GLR868
ORDERM.S. Parikh, J.1. The petitioner has brought under challenge under Section 29(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947, hereinafter referred to as 'The Rent Act', the Judgment and Decree passed by the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court at Ahmedabad in Appeal No. 142 of 1978 on 12th July, 1981. The Appellate Bench while allowing the Appeal, set aside the Judgment and Decree of learned trial Judge dismissing the suit for possessionand fixed the standard rent of the room in question at Rs. 15/- p.m. and the shed in question at Rs. 8/- p.m. both inclusive of taxes, directing the petitioner-defendant No. 1 tenant to pay Rs. 471.37 ps. by way of arrears of rent and mesne profits and also directing him to pay mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 23/- p.m. from the date of the suit till recovery of possession. The Appellate Bench directed the petitioner to vacate the suit premises and handover peaceful and vacant possession thererof to the plaintiff on ...
Ranjitbhai R. Vyas Vs. A. Mayangar, Collector of Entertainment Tax and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-16-1995
Reported in: (1995)2GLR985
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. In this petition, the challenge is against the order passed by respondent-authority directing the petitioner to pay Entertainment Tax wrongly recovered from the Cinema owners.2. The petitioner is a Manager of a cinema house in city of Ahmedabad known as Natraj Cinema. The petitioner was served with a show cause notice dated 7th January 1982 by the concerned Mamlatdar, Entertainment Tax for the District of Ahmedabad calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why the action should not be taken under Section 30 of 'The Gujarat Entertainment Tax Act ,1977' (Act) for the recovery of an amount of Rs. 1,01,467-68 ps. on the ground that there was a violation of the condition of the Government Notification dt. 1st November 1980 while giving an exemption from payment of Entertainment Tax to Hindi Film 'Bin Maa Ke Bachchey'. The reply dated 10th February 1982 was filed by the petitioner alongwith the copy of memorandum of the Exhibitors Association submitted to the Governmen...
Gordhanbhai Dhulabhai Damor Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-16-1995
Reported in: (1996)2GLR251
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. The appellant-original accused has questioned the judgment and order of conviction dated 13th June 1993 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge at Valsad in Sessions Case No. 30 of 1992 by filing this appeal through jail. 2. The accused is found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code and he is convicted and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 300/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further Rigorous Imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and he is also convicted and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further Rigorous Imprisonment for two months for the offence under Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code, by the trial Court.3. The accused has filed this appeal from the jail since he has not been abl...
Dhanpalsingh Barunsingh Thakur and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-13-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ3751; (1996)1GLR219
S.M. Soni, J.1.Appellants original accused in Sessions Case No. 264 of 1991 have preferred this appeal. This appeal is filed against the judgment and order of conviction under Section 20(b)(ii) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) and under Section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act. Each of the appellants was awarded R.I. for 10 years and a fine of Rs. 1 lac, in default R. 1, for one year under NDPS Act. Each of the appellants was also awarded sentence of R.I. for three months and fine of Rs. 500/- in default R.I. for one month under Prohibition Act. It was also ordered that substantive sentences shall run concurrently this judgment and order of the Additional City Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad Dated 21-1-92 is under challenge in this appeal.2. Brief facts leading to the prosecution of the appellants/accused are as under:Pir Mohmad Khan Nathekhan Pathan P.W.7, Police Inspector Vigilance Squad in Crime Branch, Ahmedabad City, received an information at abo...
Pravinchandra Bhikubhai Lota Vs. Chief Electoral Officer and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-13-1995
Reported in: (1996)1GLR434
N.N. Mathur, J.1. This Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking directions to quash and set aside the order of the Election Officer, Amreli dated 11-1-1995 and further to declare that the correct date of birth of the petitioner is 31-12-1969 and as such he is entitled to contest the election for the membership of State Legislative Assembly of Gujarat on having completed 25 years of age.2. The say of the petitioner is that he filled in nomination form for contesting the election of Member of Legislative Assembly, State of Gujarat from seat No. 45, Amreli City. The nomination form was submitted on 9-1-1995. By mistake, the petitioner had shown the date of birth in the column of the nomination form as 30-12-1970. The Election Officer rejected the nomination of the petitioner on the ground that he has not completed 25 years of age and as such he falls short of age for contesting the election. This was communicated to him on 11-1-1995. ...
Kulsumbai Vs. Shadul G. Patadiys
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-13-1995
Reported in: 1996ACJ287; AIR1995Guj170
M.R. Calla, J.1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Surendranagar decided several motor accident claims by a common order dated 14-3-75 including the M.A.C.T. No. 20 of 1974. The present First Appeal has been filed against the order relating to M.A.C.T. No. 20 of 1974 decided on 14-3-75. The deceased Haji Abudakar Haji Ahmed was about 45 years of age at the relevant time. He was preparing slippers and selling the same at Ahmedabad. The case of the claimants was that he was earning Rs. 400/- p.m. He met with an accident after midnight of 17-3-73 on the National Highway between Sagodara and Limbdi at about 2.00 a.m. Taxi No. GTX 347 owned by one Shardul Gandalal was being driven by Premji Bhanji. The vehicle left Ahmedabad for Rajkot with seven passengers therein. One Jayantilal Kanjibhai, the sole survivor from amongst the occupants of the taxi, was in the rear seat. His uncle Jeraj was also in the rear seat. One Vasantlal, whom Jayantilal came to know at the S. T. Stand, also sat in...
Kulsumbai and ors. Vs. Shadul G. Patadiys and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-13-1995
Reported in: I(1997)ACC284
M.R. Calla, J.1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Surendranagar decided several motor accident claims by a common order dated 14.3.1975 including the M. A.C.T. No. 20 of 1974. The present First Appeal has been filed against the ^ order relating to M.A.C.T. No. 20 of 1974; decided on 14.3.1975. The deceased Haji Abubakar Haji Ahmed was about 45 years of age at the relevant time. He was preparing slippers and selling the same at Ahmedabad. The case of the claimants was that he was earning Rs. 400/- p.m. He met with an accident after midnight of 17.3.1973 on the National Highway between Sagodara and Limbdi at about 2 a.m. Taxi No. GTX 347 owned by one Shadul Gandalal was being driven by Premji Bhanji. The vehicle left Ahmedabad for Rajkot with seven passengers therein. One Jayantilal Kanjibhai, the sole survivor from amongst the occupants of the taxi, was in the rear seat. His uncle Jeraj was also in the rear seat. One Vasantlal, whom Jayantilal came to know at the S.T. Stand, also s...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »