Gujarat Court February 1995 Judgments
Bharat Chemical Works and ors. Vs. Gujarat State Financial Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-21-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Guj5; (1996)1GLR147
ORDERN.N. Mathur, J. 1. By way of this Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek direction to quash and set aside the orders dated 22-2-1984 and 30-9-1994 passed by the District Judge, Vadodara below Exhibits 135 and 161 respectively in Miscellaneous Application No. 21 of 1977. 2. The facts culled out from various documents filed with the present Special Civil Application are as follows: The Gujarat State Financial Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'GSFC') applied to the District Judge, Vadodara under Section 31 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 (for short 'the Act of 1951') for recovery of Rs. 9,81,190.24 by sale of movable and immovable properties pledged, mortgaged and hyothecated by the petitioners to secure repayment of the amount of Rs. 7,76,000/-advanced by the GSFC. Paras 9 and 10 of the claim application are extracted as follows: '9. The opponents have committed breach of the aforesaid agreement by committi...
Tag this Judgment!Broach Textile Mills Ltd. Vs. Broach Municipality Through Administrato ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-21-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Guj181; (1995)2GLR1436
ORDERR.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioners seek a direction on the respondent Municipality for not recovering the Octroi duty on the goods imported, processed and exported by the petitioners on the ground that they were exempted under Rule 2(hh) of the Octroi Rules framed by the respondent Broach Municipality.2. The petitioner No. 1 is engaged in the business of manufacture of textile articles like yarns and fabrics of different varieties. These articles are sold by the petitioner company in and outside the Municipal limits. The petitioner company is also engaged in the activity of processing grey fabrics imported from outside the Municipal limits.3. Rule 2 (hh) of the Octroi Rules under which exemption is claimed by the petitioner Company reads as under :--'2. The following goods shall be exempted from the levy of Octroi; ............. (hh) All articles imported for repairs, process, ceremonial functions or other temporary use and brought back within one month, provided full particul...
Tag this Judgment!Jitendrakumar Chunilal Bosmiya Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-21-1995
Reported in: (1995)2GLR1547
A.N. Divecha, J.1. Rule. Service of Rule is waived by learned Assistant Government Pleader Shri D.C. Dave for the respondents. By consent of the learned Lawyers appearing for the parties, this application is taken up for hearing today itself.2. The petitioner has moved this application for setting aside the order passed by this Court on 15th March 1994 disposing of Special Civil Application No. 6606 of 1991 as withdrawn and for its restoration to file. No reply affidavit has come to be filed by or on behalf of the respondents. Shri Dave for the respondents has, however, resisted this application at the time of its hearing.3. In support of this application, the learned Advocate for the petitioner in the writ petition has filed his affidavit. The original affidavit does not appear to be on record. Shri Nanavati for the petitioner states at the Bar that an affidavit of the learned Advocate for the petitioner in the writ petition has already been filed. In that view of the matter, I have a...
Tag this Judgment!Ataji Chhanji Thakore Vs. District Development Officer, District-mehsa ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-17-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Guj11; (1996)1GLR48
ORDERR.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioners who are elected members of Saij Gram Panchayat have challenged the validity of appointment of the Respondent No. 3 as Administrator in place of the suspended Sarpanch of the Panchayat, though the tenure of the Panchayat of five years from its first meeting held on 17th Mar., 1992 is subsisting.2. The Saij Gram Panchayat which was constituted on 23rd Feb., 1992 as per the provisions of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961 held its first meeting on 17th Mar, 1992 and its tenure was for a period of five years under the law. One Raijiji Mangaji Thakore was elected as the Sarpanch of the Panchayat. In the first meeting of the Panchayat, Amaji Shankarji Thakore came to be elected as Upa-Sarpanch. The petitioners were elected as members in the general election. According to the petitioners, the Sarpanch was involved in an offence of murder punishable under Section 302 of the Penal Code and by an order dt. 28th July, 1993, he was suspended by the compete...
Tag this Judgment!Gitaben Arvindkumar Sheth Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-17-1995
Reported in: (1995)IILLJ978Guj
Rajesh Balia, J.1. A very short question is raised in this petition. The husband of the petitioner herein was serving with respondent No. 3, Anupam Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. By an order dated May 31, 1990, the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, were made applicable to the establishment of respondent No. 3 with effect from April 1, 1990, and the provident fund contributions were required to be made on and from April 1, 1990. Arvind-kumar Jayantilal Shah, husband of the present petitioner, died on July 26, 1990. The heirs of the deceased, Arvindkumar, were given the benefits accruing to the deceased under the Employees' Provident Fund Scheme, 1952, but the benefits of the family pension under the Employees' Family Pension Scheme, 1971, (for short 'the FP Scheme'), and the Employees' Deposit-Linked Insurance Scheme, 1976 (for short 'the Insurance Scheme') were denied to the heirs of the deceased, Arvindkumar. 2. The benefits of the FP Scheme were ...
Tag this Judgment!Meghdev Enterprises and anr. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-17-1995
Reported in: (1996)1GLR662
A.P. Ravani, J.1. In all these petitions the principal question raised as regards entitlement to claim refund of the amount of excise duty paid on account of wrong classification of the article manufactured by the petitioners, i.e., decorative laminated sheets, is common. Moreover, as submitted by the Learned Counsel for the parties, the facts in all the cases are almost similar. Therefore, at the request and with the consent of the learned Advocates appearing for the parties, all these petitions are ordered to be heard together.2. Decorative laminated sheets were subject to excise duty under tariff item No. 68 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 upto February 28, 1986. Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 came into force on February 28, 1986. Therefore, from March 1,1986 classification of the article was required to be made as per the Schedules provided in the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. According to the petitioners their product was paper based decorative ...
Tag this Judgment!Sabbirmiya Allarakha Saiyed Vs. Commissioner of Police
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-17-1995
Reported in: (1995)2GLR1430
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. Whether while passing the final order, in view of clear discretion left open to the Externing Authority under Section 56 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, viz., to prefer either of the two alternative preventative remedies, viz., to direct the person against whom notice under Section 59 of the Act has been issued; in the first instance, to conduct himself in a well behaved orderly manner as a law-abiding citizen and for that purpose, by taking a surety bond and imposing some additional reasonable terms and conditions or in the second instance, to remove him out of the concerned area, it is duty bound to briefly indicate the reasons particularly in case where it prefers to pass an order imposing extreme preventive remedy of ordering removal out of the area'? This in short is the question that arises for consideration in the context and background of circumstances enumerated hereunder.2. Sabbirhussain Allarakha Saiyed, the petitioner herein is a resident of Baroda. The De...
Tag this Judgment!Jaidev R. Brahmabhatt Vs. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-16-1995
Reported in: (1996)2GLR344
ORDERS.K. Keshote, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. It is not in dispute that in the S.S.C. certificate of the petitioner, his date of birth is shown as 12.12.1938. It is also not in dispute that in the School Leaving Certificate the date of birth of the petitioner is shown to be 12.12.1938. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner applied for employment on the post of Junior Clerk in the year 1966 in the office of the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, Ahmedabad and he claimed his appointment on the basis of his qualification S.S.C. The petitioner has relied on the document of SSC certificate for seeking employment in the Corporation. In the service record of the petitioner, his date of birth has been entered as 12.12.1938 on the basis of document of SSC certificate which has been submitted by himself. 3. In para 4 of the petition, the petitioner averred that 'the petitioner submits that in fact the petitioner was all throughout conscious that by mistake his bi...
Tag this Judgment!Kanbi Patel Prataprai Bhagwanji Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-14-1995
Reported in: (1996)1GLR179
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. In this appeal, the appellant-original accused has questioned the legality and validity of the judgment and order of conviction and sentence recorded in Summary Case No. 3 of 1985 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, (Special Court) at Bhavnagar, by invoking aids of Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('the Code' for short).2. The appellant is the original accused and respondent No. 2 is the original complainant. For the brevity's sake and convenience, they will be referred to as the accused and the complainant as they are arraigned before the Special Court. The accused is a licensed dealer and is running a fair price shop and dealing in foodgrains, oil, kerosene etc. at village Kamlej in Bhavnagar district since 1980. The complainant-inspector in the Civil Supplies Department at Bhavnagar made a surprise visit of the shop of the accused on 28-11-1984 and noticed some irregularities in maintenance of daily stock registers, accounts and maintenan...
Tag this Judgment!Vadodara Municipal Corporation Vs. Gajendra R. Dhumal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-14-1995
Reported in: (1996)ILLJ206Guj
R. Balia, J.1. Rule. Mr. S.P. Hasulkar, learned Advocate appears for respondent and waives service of Rule, Heard learned Counsel for the parties on merits.2. On reference being made, of the following question.The Industrial Tribunal, Vadodara made Award on the following terms on April 30, 1994.3. Aggrieved with the aforesaid Award, the Municipal Corporation, Vadodara has come up before this Court through this Special Civil Application.4. To understand contentions and controversy raised before me, it would be necessary to notice brief facts as narrated in the Award. Respondent - Gajendra R. Dhumal (hereinafter called as the workman) was appointed in 1981 by the petitioner - Corporation as Asst. Draftsman on which post he continued until when his services were wrongly terminated without following the conditions of Chapter V-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Thereafter he was appointed on Tracer's post, lower to the post of Asstt Draftsman from October 1985. By the order dated Octo...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »