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.
M. Shantilal Vs. Kasturchand Parshottamdas and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-21-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Guj38; (1995)2GLR1706
ORDER1. This Civil Revision Application is filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, is directed against the judgment and order, dismissing the Appeal From Order No. 24 of 1983 passed by the District Judge of Bharuch. The said Misc. C.A. was preferred by the present petitioner (original plaintiff-decree-holder) against the order passed by Civil Judge (S.D.), Valia, in Misc. Civil Application No. 6 of 1981 on28th February, 1983. By said order, the Executing Court, in substance, set aside and/or cancelled order dated 19th November, 1981, which was passed in execution proceedings directing the judgment-debtor to hand over possession of the property in question to the judgment-creditor.2. In order to apprecite the submission made by Mr. J.S. Adhyaru, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, it is necessary to set out few relevant facts hereunder:(i) It appears that the present petitioner instituted Summary Suit No. 4287 of 1977 in the City Civil Court at Ahmedabad to rec...
Banuma Polytex Ltd. Vs. Gujarat Electricity Board and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-21-1995
Reported in: (1996)1GLR57
N.N. Mathur, J.1. Rule.2. Mr. Tushar Mehta, waives service of Rule for the respondents. In view of the fact of the case and urgency in the matter, Rule is taken up for final hearing.3. The petitioner by way of Spl. C.A. under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeks to challenge the supplementary bill dated 18-1-1995 for Rs. 42,96,035.80 paise issued by respondent-Electricity Board in respect of petitioner's unit at Karannagar. The petitioner further seeks declaration that the action of the respondent-Gujarat Electricity Board in disconnecting the electric power supply to the petitioner's unit at Karannagar is illegal and malafide and further direct the respondents to forthwith reconnect the supply of electricity to the said unit.The facts culled out from the pleadings of the parties are that the petitioner company is engaged in manufacture of Polyester Texturised Yarn. The major part of the company's product is exported. The sale turn-over for the year 1993-94 was to the tune o...
Ramchandra Jagannath and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-20-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Guj43
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. The appellants are the original plaintiffs and the respondent is the original defendant. For the conveniences sake, the parties are hereinafter referred to as arraigned in the trial Court.2. The plaintiffs instituted a Civil Suit No. 2645 of 1974 in the City Civil Court at Ahmedabad on 1-10-1974 questioning the acquisition of Final Plot No. 108 (Part), 107 (Part) and 106 (Part) of Ellisbridge Town Planning Scheme No. 3, Ahmedabad, on the ground that it is illegal and mala fide. The plaintiffs also claimed perpetual injunction restraining the defendant-State of Gujarat, from taking possession of the acquired land from the plaintiffs.3. The suit was reserved by the defendant inter alia contending that the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation had requested the Government to acquire lands for the purpose of widening the road and accordingly the proceedings were undertaken as per the provisions of law. The contention of mala fide was seriously denied and the whole suit was chall...
Prahladbhai Manordas Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-20-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Guj49
C.K. Thakker, J.1. This petition is filed by the petitioner for an appropriate writ, direction and/or order examining the legality of orders of cancellation of registration passed against certain traders and dealers and directing the respondent authorities to place before this court records and proceedings showing as to what actions have been taken by them for recovery of sales tax dues from traders and dealers whose names appeared at Annexure-A and B to the petition.2. The petitioner who claims himself to be a vigilant citizen and social worker has approached this court by filing this petition as a pro bono publico. According to him, many irregularities and illegalities have been committed by traders whose registration came to be cancelled by the department. In para 15, it is, inter alia stated:'It is submitted that since the registrations are cancelled, their tax liability will cease and, therefore, they will go away scot free without payment of any sales tax dues and, therefore, the...
Govindbhai Dajibhai and Etc. Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-20-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Guj200; (1996)1GLR265
Shah, J.1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 19th September, 1983 passed by the learned Second Extra Assistant Judge, Nadiad, in Compensation Case No. 8 of 1980 and others, the appellants (original claimants) filed the following appeals:Sr. No.FirstAppeal No.Compensation Cases1.1293/848/802.1294/843/803.1295/844/804.1296/845/805.1297/846/806.1298/847/807.1299/849/808.1300/8410/809.1301/8411/8010.1302/8412/80By the impugned award, the Court has enhanced compensation from Rs. 55/- per Are awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer to Rs. 250/- per Are. The Court has directed that on the additional amount of compensation, the claimants are entitled to get solatium at the rate of 15%. The claimants are also awarded interest at the rate of 4.1/2% per annum from the date of award of the Special Land Acquisition Officer.2-3. In these appeals, the learned advocate for the appellants vehemently submitted that:(i) the Court ought to have granted compensation...
State of Gujarat Vs. Jaysukh @ Harsukh Hakubhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-20-1995
Reported in: (1996)2GLR33
B.C. Patel, J.1. Criminal Appeal No. 1358 of 1986 is preferred by the State for enhancement of sentence recorded by Assistant Sessions Judge, Gondal on 30th August 1986 whereby the accused was convicted for offences punishable under Sections 376, 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 300/-, in default of payment of fine, rigorous imprisonment of 6 months. While passing the sentence, the Court did not pass any separate sentence for offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 of the Penal Code.2. Accused preferred Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 1987 before the Sessions Judge against the aforesaid order of conviction and sentence and by order passed on 22-9-1989 by the Division Bench of this Court (Coram: R.J. Shah & K.J. Vaidya, JJ.) the same was ordered to be transferred to this Court and the said Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 1987 is renumbered as Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 1990.Both the appeals are arising from the ...
Rajath Leasing and Finance Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-19-1995
Reported in: [1996]217ITR115(Guj)
C.K. Thakker, J. 1. Rule. Mr. B. J. Shelat, the learned advocate for R. P. Bhatt and Co., waives the service of rule on behalf of the respondent. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, both the petitions have been taken for final hearing today. 2. Both these petitions are filed against notices of reassessment for the years 1986-87 and 1987-88 issued on January 11, 1995, under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). By the impugned notices, the petitioner was informed that the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle Rajkot (respondent herein), has reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax for the assessment years 1986-87 as well as 1987-88 escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act. Hence, the respondent proposed to reassess the income for those two assessment years. The petitioner was, therefore, called upon to show cause as to why proceedings should not be initiated against him and the income shoul...
Ketki Land Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Appropriate Authority and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-19-1995
Reported in: [1997]227ITR825(Guj)
C.K. Thakker, J. 1. Mr. J. P. Shah, learned advocate for the petitioner requests to delete respondent No. 2 from the petition as no relief is claimed against him. Request is granted. On deletion of respondent No. 2, respondent No. 1 now becomes the sole respondent. Rule. Mr. B. J. Shelat, advocate instructed by M/s. R. P. Bhatt & Co. waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent (original respondent No. 1). On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the matter is taken up for final hearing today. 2. This petition is filed by the petitioner for quashing and setting aside orders at Annexures 'G' and 'H' passed by Appropriate Authority on 28th April, 1995. By order, Annexure 'G', in exercise of powers conferred under s. 269UD(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the respondent exercised power to purchase immovable property consisting of land with superstructure situated in Bootee Street in Cantonment area, Pune bearing House No. 900 (GLR Survey No. 3...
Ketki Land Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Appropriate Authority and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-19-1995
Reported in: (1997)137CTR(Guj)233
C. K. THAKKER, J. :Mr. J. P. Shah, learned advocate for the petitioner requests to delete respondent No. 2 from the petition as no relief is claimed against him. Request is granted. On deletion of respondent No. 2, respondent No. 1 now becomes the sole respondent.Rule. Mr. B. J. Shelat, advocate instructed by M/s. R. P. Bhatt & Co. waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent (original respondent No. 1). On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.2. This petition is filed by the petitioner for quashing and setting aside orders at Annexures 'G' and 'H' passed by Appropriate Authority on 28th April, 1995. By order, Annexure 'G', in exercise of powers conferred under s. 269UD(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the respondent exercised power to purchase immovable property consisting of land with superstructure situated in Bootee Street in Cantonment area, Pune bearing House No. 900 (GLR Survey No. 390/...
S.S. Murty and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-10-1995
Reported in: (1995)2GLR1178
M.R. Calla, J.1. These two Special Civil Applications are based on identical facts, giving rise to common grievance involving identical questions and, therefore, both these petitions are decided by this common judgment and order.2. The petitioners in both these Special Civil Applications are working as Private Secretaries to the Judges of High Court in the High Court of Judicature for the State of Gujarat. They seek to claim parity with the Private Secretaries working with the Secretaries to the Government and equivalent posts in the Government Secretariat, in the matter of pay scales and claim that they should also be paid the pay scale of Rs. 3000-100-3500-125-4500. It is stated that, they are English Stenographers, Grade-I (Class-II) and except petitioner No. 3 in Special Civil Application No. 12921 of 1994, all the petitioners in both the Special Civil Applications are working as such, from different dates, from 16th October 1982. The dates of joining the service of High Court by t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »