Gujarat Court March 1999 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.
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Gnan Ganga Science Institution
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-16-1999
Reported in: [1999]238ITR473(Guj)
J.N. Bhatt, J. 1. In this group of 24 applications under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961, common questions are involved arising out of common order of the Tribunal, Rajkot Bench, dt. 3rd April, 1998, between common parties. They are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. There was a search in the premises of the five educational institutions as well as residential premises of some of the partners, one of whom was Krishnakant G. Dholakia. The AO held that all the five institutions are benamidars of one said Shri Dholakia (KGD, for short hereinafter). Thus, the AO was of the view that KGD was the real owner of the five institutions and said five firms were not genuine. The assessment orders involved and covered in this group of applications are 1986-87, 1987-88 and 1988-89, except in ITA No. 31/99. The AO on a finding that the said firms are fake refused registration under the IT Act. Upon appeals, at the instance of the assessee, against the orders of the AO, the CIT(A), Rajkot, af...
Kavas Jahangir Mamabuwala Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-16-1999
Reported in: (2000)1GLR418
K.R. Vyas, J.1. Five appellants, original accused in Sessions Case No. 193 of 1994, have filed five separate appeals challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 21-8-1995 passed against them by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Surat convicting them:(i) for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148 and 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing each of them to undergo Life Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to undergo S.I. for one year;(ii) for the offence punishable under Section 323 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing each of them to undergo S.I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 250/-, in default to undergo S.I. for fifteen days; and(iii) for the offence punishable under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act and sentencing each of them to undergo S.I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 250/-, in default to undergo S.I. for fifteen days.The sentences imposed on each of ...
Dhulaji Punjaji Thakor Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-10-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Guj250
ORDERS.K. Keshote, J.1. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a Sarpanch of the Sherisa Gram Panchayat. On 20-6-98 the then District Development Officer of the District Panchayat, Mehsana issued a show cause notice to the petitioner containing the charges against him therein. On 31-7-1998, the petitioner submitted a detailed reply to the said show cause notice. It is the case of the petitioner that the District Development Officer, District Panchayat, Mehsana after considering the reply filed by the petitioner was satisfied with the reply and the show cause notice was withdrawn. After transfer of the earlier officer, the officer, who has taken over, has given a show cause notice dated 10-12-98 to the petitioner. The petitioner filed his reply to that show cause notice on 4-1-1999. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the second show cause notice has been given in respect of the some charges, which were the subject-matter of the first show cause notice. The petiti...
Gameti Mamad Hasan Vs. District Magistrate
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-10-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ3772; (2000)4GLR765
D.C. Srivastava, J.1. The petitioner through this writ pettition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has challenged the detention order dated 14.7.1998, Annexure 'B' to the writ petition passed by the District Magistrate, Junagadh under section 3(2) of Gujarat Prevention of Antisocial Activities Act, 1985 (for short PASA) and has prayed for quashing the aforesaid order with further prayer that he be released from illegal detention forthwith.2. From the grounds of detention it appears that the Detaining Authority was subjectively satisfied that the petitioner is bootlegger and his activities were prejudicial for maintenance of public order. Subjective satisfaction was arrived at on the basis of registration of 12 offences under various sections of the Bombay Prohibition Act for running illegal distillary of wine and also for keeping countrymade liquor without pass and permit. Other activities of the petitioner connected with bootlegging giving rise to impression that these ac...
Ambalal Lallubhai Panchal Vs. L.i.C. of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-08-1999
Reported in: I(2000)ACC37; 1999ACJ956; AIR1999Guj280; [2001]104CompCas237(Guj); (1999)2GLR214
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. This appeal raises an important question as to whether death caused by a dog bite can be said to be death caused by an accident so as to make the Life Insurance Corporation liable to pay an additional sum equal to the sum assured under the accident benefit clause of the policy. 2. The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated January 12, 1998, of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Patan, in Special Civil Suit No. 179 of 1994 to the extent that it disallows the additional payment under the accident benefit clause to the appellant - original plaintiff, who filed the suit to recover the dues under the two policies which were taken out to insure the life of his son Vikram for Rs. 50,000 each on February 1, 1989, and March 28, 1989. These policies contained an accident benefit clause, which entailed payment of an additional sum equal to the sum assured under the policy, if the death was caused as a result of an accident as contemplated by that cl...
Suraj Steel Rolling Mills Vs. Union of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-08-1999
Reported in: 2000(68)ECC257; 2000(115)ELT280(Guj)
B.C. Patel, J.RULE. 1. M/s. R. J. Oza, R. C. Jani and Mr. M. R. Shah waive service of Rule on behalf of the respondents. At the request of the learned Advocates for the parties, these matters are taken up, heard and disposed of finally. In all these petitions, the question of law and facts raised by the learned Advocates being the same, these petitions are disposed of by a common judgment. 2. Petitioners, by orders passed by adjudicating authority, were required to pay different amounts from Rs. 4,26,000/- to Rs. 8,60,000. The orders were passed in the month of July and August, 1995. Against the aforesaid orders, the Appeals were preferred before the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise and Customs, Ahmedabad. The Appellate Authority, before considering the appeals on merit, found that the appellants did not comply with the directions whereby they were directed to deposit the amounts by 15-10-1997. They failed to comply with the provisions of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 19...
Nafisabanu Gulambhai Memon Vs. Collector and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-08-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Guj205; (1999)2GLR1438
ORDERM.R. Calla, J.1. The petitioner had purchased the land bearing City Survey No. 5199 and City Survey No. 6110 admeasuring 89.24 sq. mts. and 40.21 sq. mts. respectively situated at Idar on 23-4-85 through a registered sale deed from one Harmilaben H. Gurjar. The land bearing City Survey No. 6110 had been originally allotted by the Collector to the petitioner's predecessor in title as new tenure land by the order dt. 10-1-84 and, therefore, the sale in respect of this City Survey No. 6110 was effected after obtaining the requisite permission from the Collector, who had granted such permission subject to the compliance of the conditions of the original allotment. The date of original allotment in favour of Harmilaben H. Gurjar was 10-1 -84 and according to the conditions set out in the order of allotment in respect of this new tenure land the construction thereon was to be completed within a period to two years. Since the petitioner had stepped into the shoes of her predecessor in ti...
Satishkumar K. Dave Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-08-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ2628; (1999)3GLR367
A.M. Kapadia, J.1. Both these appeals arise out of common judgment and order recorded by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural), in Sessions Case No. 169 of 1991 passed on 29.1.1994 and raise questions as to whether culpability of the appellant/accused Satishkumar Kantilal Dave, held to be proved under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short) and order of sentence to suffer imprisonment for life imposed upon him can be said to be lenient and not adequate in view of the culpability of the accused who was charged with the offence of double murder of a Malayalee couple in an incident occurred between 5.15 and 5.30 in the early morning on 20.8.1991 when they visited the house of the accused in search of their victim daughter Geeta who was induced by the accused to marry him and forcibly detained her in his custody by claiming as his lawfully wedded wife inspite of the fact that he has married twice and has two wives and four children and, therefore, they are being d...
Gsrtc Vs. Heirs of Narmadashankar Bhagvandas Thakar
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-08-1999
Reported in: (1999)3GLR402
S.K. Keshote, J.1. This second appeal under section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is directed against the judgment and decree of the Assistant Judge, Mahesana dated 9-7-1980 in Regular Civil Appeal No.2 of 1978 reversing the judgment and decree of Civil Judge, (J.D.), Harij dated 24-11-1977 in Regular Civil Suit No.66 of 1973.2. The plaintiffs-respondents sued for possession of ordi and surrounding open land and to get the mesne profit for the period from which the defendants-appellants have taken the possession of the suit property till they actually got the possession and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants-appellants to demolish the construction of the ordi.3. The facts of this case are that the suit has been filed by the plaintiffs-respondents on the ground that on 1-10-1973, the defendant-appellants have illegally taken the possession of this property - ordi and surrounding land, which is situated in the compound of Harij depot of S.T.R.C. at Harij and praye...
D.V. Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-08-1999
Reported in: (2000)4GLR3019
Kundan Singh, J.1. These two petitions are connected with each other and both the petitions are filed by the same petitioner. Hence, both these petitions are disposed of by this common judgment.First petition is for quashing the impugned order dated 16-5-1984 Annexure-I whereby the petitioner's resignation was accepted with effect from 12-10-1981 and the second petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents to regularise the petitioner's interruption in duty for the period from 13-10-1981 to 26-1-1982 and to fix the pay of the petitioner with effect from 27-1-1982.2. The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Engineering Superintendent in the Department of Technical Education on 12-2-1971 and he was promoted as a Principal of Weir Industrial Institute, Dharampur by the order dated 2-4-1981. The petitioner submitted his resignation to the Director of Technical Education by his letter dated 12-9-1981. He was relieved by the Director of Technical Education by the order dated...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »