Gujarat Court March 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.
Pannaben Rameshchandra Shethji Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-28-1995
Reported in: (1996)1GLR529
A.N. Divecha, J.1. The order passed by the Mamlatdar and Agricultural Lands Tribunal at Savli (the First Authority for convenience) on 30th April, 1992 in Ceiling Case No. 115 of 1978 as affirmed in appeal by the order passed by the Deputy Collector at Vadodara (the Appellate Authority for convenience) on 23rd November, 1992 in Ceiling Appeal No. 4 of 1992 as further affirmed in revision by the decision rendened by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal at Ahmedabad (the Tribunal for convenience) on 28th July, 1993 in Revision Application No. TEN B.A. 61 of 1993 is under challenge in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. By his impugned order, the Authority declared the holding of the petitioner to be in excess of the ceiling limit by 12 acres 07 gunthas for the purposes of the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act, 1960 (the Act for brief).2. The facts giving rise to this petition move in a narrow compass. The husband (the deceased for convenience) of the petitioner was...
Gulamnabi Gulam Akbar Vs. Haji Ismail Isakji Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-28-1995
Reported in: (1995)2GLR1093
S.D. Dave, J.1. This is a revision petition by the petitioner-appellant-defendant-tenant.2. The plaintiff-landlord had instituted Regular Civil Suit No. 387 of 1976 in the Court of the learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Ankleshwar, against the petitioner-tenant for obtaining a decree of eviction on the ground of the non-payment of rent for a period of six months. The case put up by the plaintiff-landlord was that the suit premises, namely, a shop and the room situated at Ankleshwar were leased to the defendant-tenant at the monthly rent of Rs. 45/-. According to the plaintiff-landlord, previously also, two suits were instituted against the defendant-tenant for the recovery of possession, inter alia, on the ground of the non-payment of the rent, but both the proceedings were compounded and the defendant-tenant had continued in the premises as the tenant. According to the plaintiff-landlord, the necessary notice under Section 12(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act,...
Ramanbhai M. Parmar and ors. Vs. Smt. Ambaben Hargovinddas
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-28-1995
Reported in: (1995)2GLR1909
S.D. Shah, J.1. In this group of Civil Revision Applications, the respondent is the judgment-creditor and petitioners are the judgment-debtors (defendants). It appears that the respondent-plaintiff instituted Regular Civil Suit No. 461 of 1988 against Manubhai Dahyabhai Parmar (since deceased) now represented by legal heirs and representatives, who are the petitioners. The suit was filed to recover possession of the suit premises for non-payment of rent commencing from 9-3-1987 at the rate of Rs. 29/- per month till the date of the suit and for further relief of payment of rent or mesne profit at the rate of Rs. 29/- till the possession of the suit premises is handed over to the plaintiff. In such suit, the heirs and legal representatives of the original defendant appeared and contended that the rent at the rate of Rs. 29/- per month was excessive and the standard rent was Rs. 15/-only. It appears at the hearing of the suit, i.e., on 17th March, 1993 before Civil Judge, (SD), a comprom...
All Gujarat Federation of Tax Consultants and ors. Vs. Central Board o ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-1995
Reported in: [1995]214ITR276(Guj)
Rajesh Balia, J.1. In these petitions, a common question arises about the validity of Circular No. 666 (see [1993] 204 ITR 40) dated October 8, 1993, and Circular No. 681 (see [1994] 206 ITR 299 dated March 8, 1994, respectively, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes ('the Board', for short). The relief claimed is to quash the two circulars and grant reliefs consequential to the main relief. The main thrust of the contentions before this court is whether the provisions of section 194C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), providing for deduction of tax at source applies to payments made by the class of persons on whose behalf these petitions have been filed. 2. Special Civil Application No. 4802 of 1994 has been filed on behalf of the All Gujarat Federation of Tax Consultants whose members are either advocates, chartered accountants or tax consultants by profession and in the course of carrying on their profession, they are engaged by various persons...
Ahmedabad District Panchayat and anr. Vs. Pandya Fulshanker Jatashanke ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-1995
Reported in: (1996)2GLR114
1. This Civil Revision Application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the judgment and order of the Joint District Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Mirzapur dated February 24, 1994, whereby he allowed the Misc. Civil Appeal No. 36 of 1994 preferred by the respondent-plaintiff and set aside the judgment and order dated January 20, 1994, passed by the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.) thereby he restrained the Ahmedabad District Panchayat and Taluka Development Officer from retiring the respondent-plaintiff from service on February 28, 1994 till the decision of the suit. He also directed that the suit should be heard expeditiously within four months, but it is reported to this Court that till date the suit is not heard. 2. The petitioner-original defendants are aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order of the Joint District Judge and hence this Civil Revision Application is preferred. 3. It may be stated at the outset that the respondent-plaintiff Joined in the...
Modasa Nagar Panchayat Vs. Hasmukhlal Motilal Kadia and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-1995
Reported in: (1996)1GLR140
R.K. Abichandani1. The petitioner-Municipality which was formerly a Nagar Panchayat seeks a direction for setting aside the order dated 30th August 1983 passed by the Development Commissioner confirming the decision dated 1st March 1983 of the Appellate Committee of the District Panchayat, Sabarkantha, by which the Resolution No. 63 dated 13th August 1992 passed by the petitioner was set aside.2. On 28-4-1978 the petitioner, when at the time it was a Panchayat, passed Resolution No. 23 for constructing new latrines at the same place at which the old latrines were situate on the land in question. An appeal was carried against the Resolution under Section 290 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961 and the Appellate Authority by its order dated 22nd September 1980 set aside the said Resolution keeping in view the relevant aspects including the opinion of the District Health Officer that these latrines were injurious to public health and should be removed. It was noted that though the Governm...
Prahladbhai Rajaram Mehta Vs. Popatbhai Haribhai Patel and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-26-1995
Reported in: [1996]87CompCas557(Guj); (1995)2GLR1752
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. A very substantial and significant question that arises for consideration and determination is whether a conviction and eviction of a service occupier under section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956, for withholding company's premises after termination of employment, by any reason, is competent and maintainable or not in view of the protection and provision of section 28 of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947. 2. The appellant herein - original complainant who was working as deputy manager in 'New Shorrock Mills', a unit of Mafatlal Industries Limited ('the company', for short) had filed Criminal Case No. 6545 of 1988 on October 18, 1988, in the court of the learned Chief J.M.F.C., Nadiad, inter alia, contending that respondent No. 1 original accused has wrong fully withheld possession of room No. 30 in New Shorrock Nagar, the property of the company ('the disputes property', for short), after his retirement from the employment of the company...
Atul Products Ltd. Vs. Dipakkumar Jayantilal Shah
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-26-1995
Reported in: [1997]88CompCas876(Guj)
N.J. Pandya, J.1. This appeal deserves to be allowed for the simple reason that the learned members of the Company Law Board, who dealt with the matter as Appeal No. 42(III)/CLB/WR/90 have, in my opinion, not appreciated the difference between free transferability and refusal to entertain the request for splitting the shares into different names. 2. The appellant before the Board, i.e., the respondent herein, had requested the appellant to entertain the application for transfer of one equity share each as detailed out in para. 6 of the memo of appeal as a lot of 5 shares was purchased from the market and here also there is a history. 3. The shares originally belonged to one Gujarat Aromatics Limited which merged with the present appellant company. It was a case of reverse merger, in the sense that a profit-making company bearing the name of the appellant company had merged with the said Gujarat Aromatics Ltd. and in the process, the merging company became the merged company, i.e., Guja...
Parshottam Nagindas and ors. Vs. B.R. Adwalpalkar, Commissioner of Inc ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-26-1995
Reported in: (1996)131CTR(Guj)338; [1996]218ITR392(Guj)
RAJESH BALIA, J. :The petitioners who are carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of art silk cloth in Surat in the name and style of M/s. Parshottamdas Nagindas as firm, filed returns of income for the asst. yrs. 1973-74, 1974-75 and 1975-76 on 18th March, 1976, 31st March, 1976 and 31st March, 1976 respectively. The returns were filed through after the prescribed period under S. 139 in the case of each assessment year, but prior to issuance of notice under sub-s. (2) of S. 139 or under S. 148 of the Act. The petition relates to the asst. yrs. 1974-75 and 1975-76. The assessment of income for the asst. yr. 1974-75 was made on 28th Aug., 1976 and that of asst. yr. 1975-76 on 19th Nov., 1976. Apart from levy of penalty under S. 271(1)(a) for late filing of returns, the ITO also levied interest under S. 139(8) and 217 of the IT Act, 1961 and levied penalty under S. 273(b) of the Act. The petitioners filed an application on 11th Jan., 1979 under S. 273A(1) of the Act of 1961 for ...
Natvarlal Dayarjibhai Patel Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-25-1995
Reported in: (1995)129CTR(Guj)122
C.K. Thakker, J. 1. This petition is filed by the petitioner for and appropriate writ, direction and/or order quashing and setting aside the order dated October 27, 1994 (annexure-A), to the petition passed by the appropriate authority, respondent No. 2 herein by which an order was passed in exercise of the power under section 269UD(1) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. It is the case of the petitioner that respondent No. 3 owned a plot of land admeasuring 675 sq. yds situate at Maninagar, Ahmedabad, on which seven shops were constructed. All the shops were let out to different tenants and they were in possession since many years. The petitioner was also one of the tenants. Since respondent No. 3 was willing to sell the property and the petitioner was one of the sitting tenants, the petitioner was interested in buying the property. An agreement to sell was, therefore, entered into between the petitioner and respondent No. 3 on July 21, 1994, for an amoun...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »