Gujarat Court January 1996 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.
Chhanabhai Punjabhai Prajapati Vs. Kanuji Visaji and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-30-1996
Reported in: (1996)3GLR693
D.G. Karia, J.1. Chhanabhai Punjabhai Prajapati, the original complainant, who is now no more, being aggrieved by the judgment and order of acquittal dated May 19, 1983, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Narol, in Criminal Case No. 907 of 1982, had preferred the present Revision Application. By the impugned order of acquittal, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate acquitted the respondent-accused for the offence under Sections 324 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. The present Revision Application was filed through Mr. Justice J.M. Panchal, when he was an Advocate.2. On elevation of Mr. Justice Panchal to the Bench, a notice was caused to issue to the petitioner informing him that his Advocate has become the High Court Judge and as such he should appoint another Advocate in the matter or to remain present before the Court, etc. The notice could not be served on the petitioner. It is now reported that the petitioner has died on March 24, 1991. Necessary death certificate i...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Jawahar D. Dholakiya
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-1996
Reported in: [1996]220ITR393(Guj)
B.C. Patel, J. 1. The CIT, Rajkot has moved this Court by filing these three applications under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961, (thereinafter referred to 'as the Act') as application under s. 256(1) of the Act preferred by the applicant before the Tribunal to draw up a statement of the case and to refer it to this Court along with the question of law based on facts, came to be rejected. The Tribunal was requested to refer the following question : 'Whether, the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that the assessment was not validly reopened ?' 2. Assessee at the relevant time was a Development Officer in Life Insurance Corporation and was drawing incentive bonus. The Assessing Officer (AO) applied his mind to the question of claim of deduction from incentive bonus and thereafter he has come to the conclusion that deduction is permissible, allowed the same and assessed accordingly. It is also clear from the record that for asst. yrs. 1981-82 and 1982-83 such claim being rejec...
Bhurabhai Giganbhai Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-1996
Reported in: (1997)1GLR399
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. Rule. Mr. S. T. Mehta, learned A.P.P. waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent. Bhurabhai Giganbhai, claiming himself to be a friend and relative of the convict-prisoner Bhupatbhai Devayatbhai, at present undergoing life imprisonment in the Central Prison, Sabarmati, Ahmedabad, by presenting this application under Section 389 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, in person, has moved this Court, inter alia praying for getting released the said prisoner on the temporary bail for period of 15 days on the ground of marriage of his daughter and son. In support of this ground the petitioner has also annexed the copy of the Marriage Invitation Card wherein while giving a Schedule of certain sacred ceremonies it has been stated that (i) 'Mandap Muhrat' is on 24-1-1996 at 9-00 a.m., (ii) departure of 'Jan' i.e. 'marriage-party' is in early morning of 25-1-1996 and (iii) the marriage itself is to take place on the same day at 10-00 a.m. This Schedule is for the marri...
Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Vs. P.D. Solanki
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-24-1996
Reported in: (1996)2GLR137
M.R. Calla, J.Rule. 1. Mr. H. K. Rathod, learned Counsel, waives service of rule on behalf of respondent. 2. On the request of the parties, the matter is taken up for hearing today. 3. This Special Civil Application is directed against the Award dated 24-8-1993 passed by the Labour Court, Vaisad in reference (L.C.V.) No. 2248 of 1990 whereby the relief of reinstatement with full back wages has been granted to the respondent-workman. 4. The respondent-workman was working as a driver in the Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation. He was posted at Mandvi Depot. On 26-12-1985 while he was on duty en route, Jamnagar-Mandvi he handed over the bus for driving to one Harishsingh Jala of Anjar Depot and he himself occupied a seat behind a lady passenger. It is alleged that the respondent workman behaved indecently with the said lady passenger and with regard to this incident, the petitioner was charge-sheeted. Inquiry was held. At the conclusion of the inquiry, on the basis of the findings in...
Ashokbhai Manibhai Patel Vs. Jyoti Switch Gears Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-24-1996
Reported in: (1996)2GLR779; (1997)ILLJ456Guj
1. Heard learned councel. 2. This Special Civil Application is directed against the award dated July 10, 1995 passed by the Labour Court, Anand in reference (L.C.A). No. 138 of 1992 (Old Reference (L.C.N.) No. 266 of 1986). Mr. Master, learned Counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that the petitioner was in the service of the respondent company since p 1976. In the year 1985 while the petitioner was working as a labourer he was caught involved in a case of theft of the property of the company, i.e., copper conductor lying on scrap platform. The incident took place on November 24, 1985. On the report of the Security Staff a criminal case was sought to be instituted against the petitioner and on November 25, 1985 vide order Annexure 'A' the petitioner was placed under 5 suspension. On November 25, 1985 itself vide document Annexure 'B' dated November 25, 1985 the petitioner in his own handwriting admitted that he had taken two copper conductors with silver bolt and that was his serio...
Degremont India Limited Vs. Municipal Corporation, Surat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-23-1996
Reported in: (1996)2GLR23
1. The petitioner challenges the resolution bearing No. 566, dated 19th October, 1995 of the Standing Committee of the Surat Municipal Corporation, approving the contract for construction of 120 M.L.D. Capacity Water Treatment Plant at Katargam, in favour of the respondent No. 2 by accepting its tender. According to the petitioner its tender was lower than the respondent No. 2 being for an amount of Rs. 8.75 crores as against the amount of Rs. 8.89 crores. The acceptance of the tender of the respondent No. 2 by the Standing Committee is, according to the petitioner, without jurisdiction and arbitrary. It is the petitioner's case that its tender was recommended for acceptance by the Municipal Commissioner and for no valid reasons, the approval has been refused by the Standing Committee. According to the respondent Corporation, all the pros and cons of the matter were considered and for the reasons stated in the resolution, the Standing Committee had accepted the tender of the respondent...
Union of India Vs. Ambica Mill Ltd. and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-22-1996
Reported in: [1998]91CompCas587(Guj); 1997(92)ELT47(Guj)
N.J. Pandya, J.1. The only point left open by our learned brother, Justice S.D. Shah, in his order dated January 22, 1996, was 'whether Union of India can claim preference over other creditors because the company is already ordered to be wound up ?' 2. Before proceeding further, we would like to record here as to how the matter came up before us. Earlier, First Appeal No. 1607 of 1982 was decided by a Division Bench of this court. Thereafter, M.C.A. No. 2019 of 1995 came to be filed and was dealt with by a learned single judge of this court. In course thereof, the learned judge (S. D. Shah), by his order dated January 22, 1996, worked out an interim arrangement, keeping the said question open and further directing that this question be heard and decided after counsel appearing for both the sides have made their submissions, and, therefore, a peremptory date was fixed. For one reason or the other, the matter could not be taken up by the learned judge and in course of time, the matter ca...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Girish Devprasad Trivedi and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-22-1996
Reported in: 1997ACJ314; AIR1997Guj37; (1996)3GLR69
ORDER1. This Civil Revision Application is filed by the Insurance Company against the judgment and order of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, whereby on an application made under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 at Exhibit 4 in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 246 of 1993, the Tribunal has by judgment and decree dated 21st of June, 1995, directed the opponent to pay jointly and severally a sum of Rs. 50,000/ - by way of an interim compensation based on 'no fault liability' with 15 per cent interest per annum from the date of the application till payment.2. At the hearing of this petition, it was submitted before this Court by Mr. P.V. Nanavati learned Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company that the accident has admittedly taken place on 22nd of November, 1992 and in such accident Vandanaben Girishbhai Trivedi expired, the heirs and legal representatives of said Vandanaben Girishbhai Trivedi thereupon instituted the Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 246 of 1993. On the da...
K.B. Mehta Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-22-1996
Reported in: (1996)3GLR330
S.K. Keshote, J.1. Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner, a Deputy Superintendent of Police in the service of the State of Gujarat is challenging by this Writ Petition, the order dated 12-1-1996 of the respondent No. 1 by which he was placed under suspension. The suspension of the petitioner has been ordered as a criminal complaint has been lodged against him for the commission of the offences under Section 66(1)(b) and 85(1)(3) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949. The criminal complaint bears F.I.R. No. 9 of 1996 which has been lodged on 8th January, 1996 at Palanpur Police Station. The Learned Counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that the respondent-State has the power to place the petitioner under suspension on the ground pending investigation or pending trail of the criminal case under the provisions of the Gujarat Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1971. The challenge to the suspension order has also not been made in the present case by the pet...
Himanshu S. Rajyaguru and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-22-1996
Reported in: (1996)3GLR46
S.K. Keshote, J.1. Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioners. Earlier the petitioners have approached this Court in the same matter which is also subject matter of challenge in this Writ Petition. The earlier Writ Petitions have been decided by this Court on 18-12-1995 and the case of the petitioners was not accepted on merits. The relevant portion of the judgment of this Court in the previous Writ Petition filed by the petitioners reads as follows : 2. 'Now looking to the affidavit-in-reply filed in Special Civil Application No. 6229 of 1995, it is clear that Jafrabad Kelvani Uttejak Mandal is running I.T.I. since long. As a result of the depletion in the strength of students, it was not feasible to run the institute in accordance with the Grant-in-aid Code which would apply to such institutes. Accordingly, when only one trainee remained out of 16 seats, permission of Director of Employment and Training was sought to close down the institute. Permission was granted vide letter dated O...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »