Gujarat Court December 1997 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.
Kamlaben B. Sedalia Vs. Competent Authority and Additional Collector, ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-16-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR1708
K.R. Vyas, J.1. The petitioner, by way of this petition, has prayed to declare that the order dated 14-11-1996 at Annexure-H passed by the Competent Authority and Additional Collector, U.L.C., Ahmedabad, is without jurisdiction, null and void and to quash and set aside the same and to direct him to issue no objection certificate for sale of the property in question and has further prayed to declare that the petitioner is entitled to registration of the sale deed at Annexure-C for sale of Plot No. 30, at Satyagrah Chhavani, at Ahmedabad in favour of Shri Rakeshbhai Ranchhodbhai Gandhi and Smt. Jyotiben Rakeshbhai Gandhi and to issue appropriate direction to the Sub-Registrar, Ahmedabad to register the sale deed.2. On 19-12-1994, in case No. 3822, the Competent Authority has declared 846 sq. mtrs., of surplus land out of Plot No. 30 in Satyagrah Chhavani Co-operative Housing Society, at Ahmedabad. It appears that there was an error in the calculation of measurement in the said order. The...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Suresh Amichand Shah (Huf)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-15-1997
Reported in: [1999]240ITR291(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J. 1. In these applications made by the Revenue under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, the following two questions are proposed by the applicant for the opinion of this Court: '1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was not justified in confirming the order of the CIT(A), Surat whereby it is an admitted fact that during the assessment year under appeal, no final deeds of the flats, etc. were executed and no registration was effected in favour of prospective buyers as contemplated under s. 54 of the Property Act. In absence of such legal obligation, the assessee was a legal and real owner of the said property and the property income was rightly taxed in the hands of the assessee under ss. 22 and 23 of the IT Act. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal further erred in holding that if the property income is taxed in the hands of the assessee, there will be double taxation as the flat owners have also...
Vasantiben D/O. Amratlal Cheldas Vs. Ambalal Cheldas Ghanchi
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-15-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR942
M.S. Parikh, J.1. This First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'the C.P.C') has been directed against the impugned order dated 22-4-1997 rendered by the learned Judge of the executing Court in Special Darkhast No. 7 of 1992 [Civil Judge (S.D.), Palanpur]. For the purpose of proper appreciation of the factual background of the matter, it would be necessary to first set out the pedigree for locating where the parties to this appeal stand in that pedigree. Cheldas Bhikhabhai died on 2-5-1950 ------------- | Kashibai, widow of Cheldas Bhikhabhai died on 27-1-1957 ----------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | | Amrutlal Narmada Mangu Hira Adopted son (son) died on (daughters .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..) Ambalal Cheldas 29-2-1948 (respondenl-orgn. | plaintiff-decree Kantaben (wife) holder-Execution died on 22-7-1992 petitioner). (Orgn. Deft. Judgment-debtor) | Vasanti (daughter) (appellant-objector).Once again, it would be impo...
S.C. Agarwal Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-15-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR1405
ORDER23. The learned Advocate for the respondent prays for stay of operation of the order passed by This Court today, with a view to go before the Letters Patent Appeal Bench. Taking into consideration the question involved in this matter I am of the view that they must be given an opportunity to go before higher forum. I would, therefore, stay operation of the final order passed by This Court, except stopping of payment to the extent of 40% because if that order is stayed than the very purpose of passing of order is likely to be frustrated. Therefore, I stay operation of the order of This Court, except stopping of payment to the extent of 40% till 10-2-1998. The order passed by This Court to stop payment to the extent of 40% to respondent Nos. 4 to 6 is to remain in force.24. Mr. S.N. Shelat, learned Additional Advocate General alongwith learned Advocates for the respondent Nos. 4 to 6 has appeared and he stated that he wants to file a review application before This Court and therefor...
Naranji Peraji Transport Co. Vs. Ramnikbhai B. Waghela
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-12-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR984
R.M. Doshit, J.1. This petition arises of the judgment and award of the learned Chief Judge, Labour Court, Rajkot passed on Recovery Application No. 1322 of 1980 on 30th April, 1984. 2. The respondent herein (hereinafter referred to as 'the workman') was in employment with the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the transport company') for more than nine years. It appears that on 1st May, 1980, the workman resigned from the service and on 23rd July, 1980, he preferred the above Recovery Application No. 1322 of 1980 under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The workman claimed that every day he had worked for nearly 12 hours and he was, therefore, entitled to overtime for three hours every day. He further claimed that he had worked on all Sundays without any leave and he was entitled to a weekly-off. He, therefore, claimed wages for 468 Sundays. He also claimed wages for 63 days' leave and bonus at the rate of 20 per cent for ...
Visnubhai Manibhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-11-1997
Reported in: (1998)1GLR554
K. Sreedharan, C.J.1. Rule. With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal today.2. Petitioners, three in number, challenge Notification dated 22-4-1997 issued by the State Government under Chapter VI1-A of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'The Act'), whereby management and administration of Shri Kalika Mataji Temple, situated at the top of Pavagadh Hill, near Champaner in Halol Taluka of Panchmahals District has been taken over.3. Petitioners are public spirited persons, interested in protecting Kalika Mataji Temple by initiating this proceeding as Public Interest Litigation. It is their case that thousands of pilgrims visit the temple and perform rituals. The temple is an ancient one. The present Pujari of the temple claimed ownership over it and tried to appropriate its income. By a decision in Charity Commissioner v. Balashanker Mahashanker Bhattji and Ors. reported in 1992(2) GLH 596, this Court declared the temple as a 'Pu...
AbdulhuseIn Shaikh Abdul Kadar Topia Vs. Idris Alibhai Kinkhabwala and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-09-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR1219
S.K. Keshote, J.1. Challenge has been made by petitioner to the order of the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Surat Division, Surat, in Misc. Application No. 1 of 1983 in its purporting exercise of powers conferred under Section 68(e) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act 1950').2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that this petition is filed by Dawat Properties Trust, a Trust registered under the provisions of the Act 1950, through its Manager against the aforesaid impugned order. The respondent No. 1 filed an application to the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Surat, and prayer has been made therein to call for books of accounts, bank-books, deed, minute book of the petitioner-Trust for the years 1970 to 1983 etc., in the office of the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Surat, for inspecting those books etc., by defendant No. 1 alongwith his auditor. Before the Assistant Charity Commissioner, the petitioner-Trust has made a statement that the Trust ...
Saij Gram Panchayat and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-08-1997
Reported in: AIR1998Guj124; (1998)2GLR997
K. Sreedharan, C.J. 1. Petitioners-Saij Gram Panchayat, its Surpanch and elected members-- in all 14 in number, have challenged Notification issued by the State Government on 7-9-1993, declaring Kulol (Mehsana) industrial estate as industrial area under Section 16 of the Gujarat Industrial Development Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as me GID Act).2. In Special Civil Application Nos. 6653 of 1997 and 6739 of 1997 notification issued by the State Government under Section 16 of the GID Act constituting Vithal Udyognagar Industrial Area (Additional), was questioned. By judgment dated 21-11-1997 a Division Bench of this Court, to which one of us (K. Sreedharan C. J.) was a party, upheld the notification. The questions raised in those writ petitions were identical to the one raised in this petition as well but according to the learned Counsel representing the petitioners herein, the impact of Seventy-third and Seventy-fourth Amendments to the Constitution, on Section 16 of the GID Act wa...
Kachchh Wakf Board Vs. Kachchh Memon Jamat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-08-1997
Reported in: (1998)1GLR487
R. Balia, J.1. This Second Appeal is by two of the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 in original Civil Suit No. 237 of 1970, in the Court of Joint Civil Judge, Bhuj-Kutch, against the judgment and decree dated 15-10-1978 passed by Extra Assistant Judge, Kutch in Civil Regular Appeal No. 176 of 1974 affirming the judgment and decree passed by Joint Civil Judge, Bhuj-Kutch, on 18-11-1974. The appellants are Kutch Wakf Board through its Secretary, Kutch Muslim and Education Welfare Society, a Wakf registered under the Wakf Act, 1954.2. The facts leading to the present appeal are that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 -Sadhu Nandram Govindram and Thacker Purshottam Ganesh filed a suit as the representative suit under Order I, Rule 8 for the following reliefs:(i) That it be declared that above mentioned suit property bearing Survey No. 917 of Bhuj shown as Karimdina alias Kalu Suleman Musafarkhana mentioned in the supplementary list of Wakfs of Kutch at Serial No. 2 in the Gujarat Government Gazette dated 6-5-...
Ravindra M. Warde Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-08-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR1499
K. Sreedharan, C.J.1. Petitioner claims to be a member of 'Mahar' community which is a Scheduled Caste as per the Presidential Order dated 18-9-1976. He wants the benefit of reservation for appointment to the post of Unarmed Police Constable. He applied for a certificate to get the benefit of reservation as a member of the Scheduled Caste community. The certificate was denied. Hence, he has approached This Court, inter alia, praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the Sub-Regional Employment Officer to include his name for being considered by the selection committee for the post of unarmed police constable.2. By virtue of the interim order passed by This Court the petitioner was considered by the selection committee as a member of the Scheduled Caste and the result has been kept in sealed cover and the result has not been declared.3. A detailed affidavit-in-reply has been filed by P.N. Parmar, Deputy Director of Social Welfare Department, Gujarat State. The contention take...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »