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.
Satyendrakumar Parbatsinh Zala and ors. Vs. the Secretary, Govt. of Gu ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-07-1997
Reported in: (1997)1GLR364
S.D. Shah, J.1. Appointment on compassionate ground in a public employment, though now judicially recognised in India by various dictums of the Supreme Court and many High Courts, does require investigation as to whether there is a right in the dependent of the deceased employee to get public employment or as to whether there is any legal obligation on the employer to offer such appointment. While considering such a question which arise for consideration in this group of petitions, this Court is reminded of following famous anecdote:A hustling society woman called on President Lincoln and told him .'My son must be given a commission. It is right of our family. Sir, since my grandfather fought at Lexington, my uncle was one of the few who stood his ground at Bladen-sburg, my father was in the battle of New Orleans and my husband died in the battle of Monterey.''My dear lady' said Abraham Lincoln 'your family has done enough for the nation. It is time to give somebody else a chance'.2. T...
Saradbhai M. Lakhani Vs. Income Tax Officer
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-05-1997
Reported in: (1998)145CTR(Guj)110; [1998]231ITR779(Guj)
K. Sreedharan, C.J. 1. Rule. With the consent of the parties, the petitions are taken up for final disposal. The petitioners are assessees under the IT Act for the last several years. They were partners of firm, under the name and style of 'M/s Bharat Vijay Construction Co.'. They were assessed during the asst. yr. 1988-89 under s. 143(1) of the Act. They were served with notice dt. 13th March, 1997, issued under s. 148 of the Act, stating that income for the asst. yr. 1988-89 has escaped assessment' within the meaning of s. 147 of the IT Act. Validity of these notices are questioned in these petitions. Issues raised for quashing the notices are the same. So, we consider it advantageous to dispose of these petitions by a common judgment. 2. Facts alleged by the petitioners in these petitions are identical. They are as follows : Petitioners filed return for the asst. yr. 1988-89, enclosing therewith income and expenditure account, wherein it showed an amount of Rs. 47,82,922.50 by way o...
Ghisalal Chhavra Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-05-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR1031
M.S. Shah, J.1. This petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution challenges the judgment and order dated October 21, 1997 passed by the Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal at Ahmedabad rejecting Original Application No. 355 of 1997 with Misc. Application No. 804 of 1997 filed by the petitioner herein for challenging the seniority of respondent Nos. 3 and 4 herein for the combined cadre of Booking Clerks and Ticket Checkers in the Western Railway as fixed by respondent No. 2 in the year 1985. 2. The Tribunal has dismissed the application on the ground that the decision taken by the department as far back as in the year 1985 treating respondent Nos. 3 and 4 as senior to the petitioner is challenged before the Tribunal after a long lapse of 12 years and, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to take up this dispute. As regards the petitioner's contention that he had made representations in the years 1985 and 1988, the Tribunal has given a finding that there is no material on the ...
Ahmedbhai Lalbhai Malek Vs. Managing Director, G.S.R.T.C. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-05-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR314
R. Balia, J. 1. Petitioner has approached this Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction, in the circumstances noticed hereafter. 2. Petitioner joined the respondent-Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') as Conductor in 1970. On April 2, 1994, while he was on duty enroute from Jagadia to Ankleshwar, there was a checking and as per the allegations of the respondent-Corporation, petitioner was found carrying some passengers without ticket and, some passengers, to whom after charging amount tickets were not issued. After holding inquiry, services of petitioner were terminated by Order dated October 29, 1994. At the time when order of dismissal was made, some proceedings were pending in respect of industrial dispute before the Conciliation Officer. The misconduct for which respondents sought to dismiss the petitioner was not connected with that dispute. After making dismissal order, the Corporation applied for approval of the acti...
Salora Finance Ltd. Vs. Mcm Hotels Pvt. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-05-1997
Reported in: (1999)2GLR1028
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. Rule. Heard the learned Advocates for both parties and with the consent of learned Advocates matter is heard and finally disposed of today.2. Should we accept the plea of mercy in accepting an unqualified apology Would it not be a travesty of majesty of justice Could the contemner be let off or left scot-free in case of gross contemptuous conduct and virulent vilification in the shape of breaches of five undertakings and 15 orders of the Court Such a question comes in focus in view of repeated requests to accept an unqualified apology for contempt.3. Before we examine the mercy jurisdiction and jurisprudential justness on this count, let it be manifestly pronounced at the inception that it is not that, the Court is empowered with one of the weapons in its armory to punish for contempt only is for preserving, protecting and piloting the dignity, decency and decorum of a Court, as it would appear from the plain expression of 'Contempt of Court', but also to protect, prom...
Dhirajlal Harjivan Vayada Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-05-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR1231
S.D. Pandit, J.1. Dhirajlal Harjivan Vayada has filed the present petition challenging the order passed by the respondent No. 1 in Revision Application No. 31 of 1996 on 21st June, 1997. The present petitioner is the neighour of respondent No. 4 Kanuben Ratansinh Shah and both the petitioner and respondent No. 4 are residing within Municipal area of Bhuj Nagarpalika. The respondent No. 4 is having her old house in her property and she had sought permission of the Nagarpalika to pull down the old building and raise a new construction as per plans and estimates submitted by her. The said plans were approved by the Municipality and necessary permission to raise construction was granted by the Nagarpalika. Thereafter, respondent No. 4 started raising construction in the same and it seems that the present petitioner felt that by the said construction, there is an encroachment on his easementary right by the respondent No. 4. He, therefore, raised obstruction to the respondent No. 4 in compl...
Madhubhai Bhikhabhai Mina Vs. Tax Recovery Officer
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-04-1997
Reported in: [1998]231ITR634(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. Rule. Learned counsel Mr. Mihir Joshi for M/s M. R. Bhatt & Co. waives service of rule. 2. At the instance of both the sides, the matter is being finally disposed of. The petitioner challenges the sale proclamation dt. 4th February, 1997, and also the sale of petitioner's property in question held on 25th March, 1997, as per the advertisement published on 12th March, 1997, and seeks a direction on the respondents from selling the property of the petitioner, without issuing a valid proclamation of sale, as provided by the IT Act and the Rules. 3. The notice for settlement of sale proclamation was issued on 4th February, 1997, informing the petitioner that (blank) day of March, 1997 was fixed for drawing up the proclamation of sale and settling the terms thereof. However, before that could be done, on 4th February, 1997 itself, it was declared that the sale of the property in question will take place on 25th March, 1997. 4. Similar situation had arisen before this ...
P.B. Pedi Trust and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-04-1997
Reported in: [2001]103CompCas249(Guj); (1998)1GLR240
K. Sreedharan, C.J. 1. Petitioner is Parshwanath Bhagwan's Pedi, a Public Trust represented by five trustees (hereinafter referred to as the Trust). This trust is registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act and is an assessee under the Income Tax Act with Permanent Account No. P.31-00-HN-4871/Addl.A/Rev. Navsari.2. Navsari Jain temple is owned and managedby this trust. Large steel cash box, known asBhandara, is kept in the temple to receive offeringsfrom the devotees. The said box was last openedon October 16, 1977. Offerings put in the boxremained in it till it was opened on January 19,1978 when the Government promulgated HighDenomination Bank Notes (Demonetisation)Ordinance 1978 (hereinafter referred to as theOrdinance), which came into force on January16, 1978. The Trust sealed the cash box. ExecutiveCommittee of the Trust opened the box on January.19, 1978. 76 high denomination currency notesof Rs. 1000/- each, were found in the said box.For getting those notes exchanged, declara...
i.B. Vyas, Police Inspector Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-04-1997
Reported in: (1998)1GLR346
ORDER Report of the Investigating Officer under Section 169 of the Code pursuant to the accused is accepted. The accused is released and discharged. Personal bond executed by the accused in pursuance of the order dated 8-5-1996 stands cancelled. Pronounced in the open Court on 14-5-1996.Sd/- J.R. VoraSpecial Judge7. I have perused the police diary of C.R. No. 216 of 1996. Nothing substantial has been done in this case. Mr. D.N. Patel, learned A.P.P. submitted that the police is in search of the person who gave false information to the police from Pali. For this two computer photographs have been prepared. I cannot understand when even according to the police the said information was received on telephone how and what basis a computer photograph could be prepared. There is no progress beyond this, in this case.F.I.R. Case No. 403 of 1996 of Kotwali police station, Pali for offence under Sees. 120-B, 195, 196, 342, 347, 357, 369, 458, 4821.P.C. and Sees. 17, 58(1) and 58(2) ofN.D.P.S. Ac...
Wipro Ltd. Vs. District Collector and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-04-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR956
R. Balia, J.1. A short issue is raised in this petition. Petitioners are manufacturing hydro-generated oil, i.e., Vanaspati. It is one of the commodity covered under the Gujarat Essential Articles (Licensing, Control and Stock Declaration) Order, 1981, issued under Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The facts which are not disputed, and are necessary for resolving the present controversy are that petitioners intimated to the Collector on 28th December, 1990 through two separate documents, Intimation Nos. 792 and 793, in Form prescribed for that purpose about moving the stated number of tins of vegetable oil comprising of two consignments from the place of its disclosed storage to a destination outside State with necessary particulars. Order No. GTH/84(A)/3/ECA/1180/6419/B dated 6-1-1984 issued in exercise of powers under Sub-clause (1) of Clause 24 by the Government of Gujarat provides that information regarding sale including agreement to sell, disposal, delivery or distribution of edib...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »