Gujarat Court May 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.
Vanrajsinh Danubha Jadeja Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-11-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ1849
ORDERR.M. Doshit, J.1. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.2. The petitioner appears to be engaged in the activity of manufacturing country-liquor and bootlegging. During the period from March, 1995 to January, 1998, as many as 5 prohibition cases have been lodged against the petitioner and in each of the cases, the petitioner has been released on bail. The said cases are pending for trial before the concerned Courts. In view of the aforesaid bootlegging activities carried on by the petitioner, and in view of the statements of the witnesses, the petitioner, under order dated 5th August, 1998, has been detained in custody by the District Magistrate, Rajkot, made under the powers conferred upon him under Section 3(2) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act').3. Apart from the petitioner's activities of manufacturing country liquor and bootlegging, the Detaining Authority has stated him to be a head strong person w...
S. Vs. E.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-11-1999
Reported in: (1999)2GLR1814
M.S. Parikh, J.1. This is a petition under Section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 moved by the petitioner-husband against the respondent No. 1 -wife, joining the respondent No. 2 as alleged adulterer. Short facts on the basis of which this petition has been moved may briefly be noted:2. The marriage of the petitioner and the 1st respondent was solemnized according to the Christian Law on 4-11-1995. There is no child out of the said marriage. The parties could not live together for more than a year and in October/ November 1996 their relations got strained with the result that they were required to live separately from each other. It is the petitioner's case that thereafter on or around 2-11-1998 the respondent No. 1 got married with respondent No. 2 and on account of that occasion, it is further the case of the petitioner that the respondent No. 1 is guilty of adultery.3. The petitioner has, therefore, prayed for obtaining decree of dissolution of his marriage with the respondent N...
i.H. Otha Vs. Gujarat State Seeds Corporation Ltd. and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-10-1999
Reported in: (1999)3GLR2699
S.K. Keshote, J.1. The petitioner, P.S. to Managing Director of Gujarat State Seeds Corporation Ltd., filed this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India challenging thereunder the circular dated 25th September, 1998 of the Corporation and the communication dated 12th March, 1999 of the Corporation, Annexures 'C' and 'E' respectively on the record of this petition. Prayer has also been made for quashing and setting aside of this circular and the communication. 2. The facts of this case are that on 31 st May, 1995, the petitioner was appointed as Stenographer Gr. I (English) by the respondent-Corporation. It is the case of the petitioner that as per the terms of the appointment, his retirement age is of 60 years (emphasis provided). On 2-12-1975, the petitioner was appointed as P.A.-cum-Stenographer Gr. I (English) with the same service conditions. The designation of P.A.-cum-Stenographer Gr. I (English) was changed subsequently and it is known as P.S. to Managing Director. ...
Sumerchand JaIn Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-10-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Guj72; (2000)1GLR355
ORDERS.K. Keshote, J.1. The petitioner, an elected President of Modasa Nagar Palika, Modasa,Dist. Sabarkantha, by this Special Civil application under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges the notice issued by the respondent No. 2 bearing No. 673/A/99 dated 26th March, 1999, Annexure 'A' to this petition, under which the petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why he should not be declared disqualified under the provisions of Sections 11 and 38 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1963') to hold the office of the Councillor of the Municipality. Prayer is made for quashing and setting aside of this notice.2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner was convicted for the offences punishable under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1955 by the J.M.F.C. Modasa in Criminal Case No. 2632/88 decided on 28th January, 1999. He was sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5000/-. In case of default i...
Gujarat Sidhee Cement Ltd. Vs. Caldyn Apparetabau Gmbh and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-09-1999
Reported in: [1999]97CompCas854(Guj); (1997)3GLR533
S.D. Dave, J.1. The present appeal from order arises out of the orders passed by the learned Chamber judge, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, on the Notice of Motion in Civil Suit No. 1133 of 1997 dated March 11, 1997, and March 14, 1997. 2. The appellant before me happens to be original defendant No. 1. Respondent No. 1 happens to be the original plaintiff. The rest of the respondents happen to be original defendants Nos. 2 and 3. The parties shall be referred to as per their nomenclature before the court below. The plaintiff, which can for the sake of brevity could be referred as 'Caldyn' has filed Civil Suit No. 1133 of 1997, against the three defendants, namely Gujarat Cement Limited, State Bank of India, Commercial Branch, Ahmedabad and SGZ Bank, Germany. According to the plaintiff, they are a company registered under the German laws at Germany and happen to be the manufacturers and suppliers of Caldyn Systems, which are used for quenching of hot gases in a variety of industries. Accor...
G.K. Vaghela Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-07-1999
Reported in: (2000)1GLR5
C.K. Thakker, J.1. Rule. Mr.Rasesh Oza appears and waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondents. In the facts and circumstances of the case the matter is taken up for final hearing.2. This petition is filed against the dismissal of OA 604 of 1998 by the Central Administrative Tribunal ('CAT' for short) on September 24, 1998. Being aggrieved by an order imposing penalty, passed by the Disciplinary Authority, the petitioner approached CAT by filing the above petition. It was the case of the petitioner before CAT that the order was violative of principles of natural justice and fair play. It was also contended that in the facts and circumstances of the case, no such order could have been passed by the Authority and the order was, therefore, illegal and ultra vires and was liable to be quashed and set aside. On merits also, submissions were made on behalf of the petitioner. The CAT, after considering the rival contentions of the parties, observed that under Rule 23 of the ...
Amit B. Thakker Vs. Air India and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-06-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Guj341; (1999)3GLR2749
ORDERD.C. Srivastava, J. 1. The prayer of the petitioner in thispetition is for quashing the action of the first respondent awarding the contract for ground handling work on behalf of Air India at S.V.P. International Airport, Ahmedabad to the second respondent. Brief allegations in the writ petition are as under: 2. The petitioner is proprietor of a firm M/s. Meeta Constructions and is engaged in multifarious activities having vide experience in various fields at the management level. In the first week of June, 1997, advertisement appeared in Times of India, inviting tenders from various agencies for taking up ground handling work on behalf of Airport at S.V.P. International Airport at Ahmedabad. In response to this advertisement, the petitioner submitted his tender to the respondent No. 1 on 20.6.1997 @ Rs. 45,100/- per flight as ground handling charges. Subsequently, further details were sought from the petitioner which were submitted by him. The tenders were opened at Bombay. The s...
State of Gujarat Vs. Mochi Raju @ Balvant Popat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-06-1999
Reported in: (2000)2GLR14
Patel, J.1. State has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 511 of 1985 against the order passed by learned Sessions Judge, Rajkot whereby the accused was acquitted for an offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Criminal Appeal No. 512/85 is preferred under section 11(2) of the Probation of Offenders Act against the order passed by the Sessions Judge, Rajkot releasing the accused on probation in Sessions Case No. 4 of 1985.2. Short facts of the case, as it emerges from the record, are as under :-2.1 The respondent-accused, who at the relevant time was aged about 19 years, was working with one Bhupendrapuri Gosai, PW. 4, who was doing business of Behl-puri. Deceased Balubhai Nathalal was carrying on his business of fruit in a hand-cart just near the place where Bhupendrapuri PW. 4 was carrying on the business. On 30.10.1980 at about 6.00/6.15 p.m, for collecting fresh water, the accused emptied the vessel by throwing the water on the side of the hand cart of the deceased ...
Mohit Shantilal Shah Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-05-1999
Reported in: [2000]241ITR28(Guj)
Rajesh Balia, J.1. This petition is challenging the order of Designated Authority rejecting the application of the petitioner under Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme as introduced by the Finance Act No. 2 of 1998. The order is dt. 23rd February, 1999. 2. First noticing the facts, the petitioner filed a return of his income for asst. yr. 1996-97 on 31st August, 1996. He claimed certain amount received by him as arrears of professional fees after he ceased to be a practising advocate as not liable to tax relying on decision of Calcutta High Court in CIT vs . Justice R. M. Datta : [1989]180ITR86(Cal) and Bench of Tribunal at Delhi in the case of Kuldip Singh vs. ITO. The petitioner paid the tax on the basis of return submitted by him in terms of s. 140A of the IT Act. The ITO acting under s. 143(1)(a) computed on the basis of such return the amount of tax or interest, if any, payable by the assessee and he found that some interest was payable by the assessee on the basis of such return under ss. ...
N.N. Desai Charitable Trust Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-05-1999
Reported in: [2000]246ITR452(Guj)
Rajesh Balia, J. 1. Rule. Service of rule is waived by learned counsel for the respondent. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. This petition is directed to quash the order of the CIT, Surat, dated 18th Feburary, 1999, by which application of the petitioner under s. 80G(5) of the IT Act, 1961, has been rejected. Petitioners are trustees of N. N. Desai Charitable Trust. The said trust is a public charitable trust registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. The objects of the petitioner-trust are wholly charitable. The trust was also registered under s. 12A of the IT Act vide entry in register of applications at No. 110-931-N/97, dated 28th November, 1991. 4. This being a wholly charitable trust was entitled to exemption from tax in respect of its income under ss. 11 and 12 of the Act. Under s. 11(1)(a)(b) and (c) of the Act income from any property held for charitable purposes, and under clause (d) of s. 11(1) of the Act, income in the form of voluntary contributions ma...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »