Gujarat Court July 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.
Ahmed N. Makada Vs. Government of India and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-21-1999
Reported in: [2000(85)FLR82]; (2000)1GLR52
D.C. Srivastava, J.1. Notice of this petition has been served on all the four respondents by Registered Post, but none has appeared to contest this petition. Consequently, it is being finally disposed of at the admission stage. 2. Brief facts giving rise to this petition are as under : 3. The petitioner was employed with the Memon Co-operative Bank Ltd. He was served with an order of suspension dated 21.12.1995 and charge-sheet dated 24.1.1996. Departmental Inquiry was conducted against the petitioner. It is alleged that the inquiry was conducted illegally and his demand for furnishing copies of documents was not given any heed. The petitioner was dismissed from service vide letter Annexure-A dated 11.8.1997. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner approached the respondent No. 2 Assistant Labour Commissioner with his grievances contained in Annexure-B. The respondent Nos. 3 & 4 appeared before the Conciliation Officer and filed their reply. Conciliation proceedings ultimately failed because...
Sunny Dharampalsingh Chaudhary Vs. Gujarat Secondary Education Board a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-21-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Guj17
ORDERM.R. Calla, J.1. These two petitions are based on identical facts and involve common questions of law. I, therefore, propose to decide both these petitions by this common judgment and order.2. The petitioners herein were studyingin Xth Std. at St. Xaviers High School, Gandhinagar. They have come with the case that they are students with good academic record throughout and in one of the petitions, the petitioner Sunny Chaudhary has also annexed copies of mark-sheets of the Examinations of VIIth, VIIIth and IXth Stds. to evidence the fact that he has been a First Class student. He has also annexed the copy of the mark-sheet at page No. 20 of this petition to show that he has been given Grade-I in the Xth Std. itself for the First and Second Terms. Regarding the other petitioner namely, Master Sushant Chopra, it has been stated in paragraph 4 of the petition that he has been studying in the St. Xaviers High School, Gandhinagar since IIIrd Std. and he has throughout passed with distin...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Cadila Antibiotics Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-21-1999
Reported in: [2001]252ITR197(Guj)
1. By preferring these two applications, the Commissioner of Income-tax has requested the court to direct the Tribunal to refer the questions to this court.2. The Commissioner of Income-tax raised one question in Income-tax Application No. 66 of 1999 which is as under :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to deduction of Rs. 30 lakhs under Section 52AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961?'3. The Commissioner of Income-tax raised three questions in Income-tax Application No. 71 of 1999 which are as under :'1. Whether, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and deleting the interest of Rs. 76,64,412 on account of interest free advance made to the sister concerns, other than for business purposes ? 2. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the order passed by the learned...
Prakash Sholaram Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-21-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ2559; (2000)1GLR302
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. Whether the appellant-original accused, husband of the deceased Bai Basu, is rightly held guilty for having committed an offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) by committing the murder of his wife by setting her ablaze or not This is the substratum of this conviction appeal under section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Code).2. The appellant, who is original accused No.1 (hereinafter referred to as the accused) husband of the deceased Bai Basu, by filing this appeal through Jail has questioned the legality of his conviction under section 302 of the IPC recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Surat in Sessions Case No.11/89, and the resultant imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default to suffer RI for one month more. The accused was provided legal aid.3. A short spectrum of relevant and material facts leading to the rise of this appeal needs narration at the first stage so as to examine the merits of the appea...
State of Gujarat Vs. Chavda Manaji Chelaji
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-20-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ1091; (2000)1GLR13
R.K. Abichandani,J.1. This acquittal appeal has been preferred against the judgement and order dated 12.12.1991 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana in Sessions Case No. 186 of 1990, acquitting all the seven respondents - accused persons, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 504 read with Section 149 and/or Section 34 and Sections 147, 148 and 447 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 135 of the Bombay Police Act.2. All these accused persons were alleged to have formed an unlawful assembly with a view to commit murder of Hariji Mongaji Chavda and in pursuance of such common object, they are said to have attacked Hariji with lethal weapons like dharias and sticks and caused his death by inflicting multiple injuries on him, around 4.45 P.M on 28th May, 1990 in the field of Hariji, bearing Survey No. 1720 in village Kada, which is in Tal. Visnagar of Mehsana District. The prosecution version is that on 27th May, 1990, there was a quarrel over removing a part of ...
Maganlal Mepabhai Patel Vs. Competent Authority and Ex Officio Additio ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-20-1999
Reported in: (1999)3GLR2105
Y.B. Bhatt, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.2. There is no controversy that the present petition challenges certain orders passed by the authorities under the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976.3. There is also no dispute that the State of Gujarat adopted the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 on 30th March 1999. There cannot be any dispute that the present petition was pending on the date when the Repeal Act came into force.4. At the present stage I am directly concerned, not with the merits of the petition, i.e. not with the merits of the impugned orders, but as to the applicability of Section 4 of the Act of 1999. This limited controversy not only goes to the root of the problem, but is also the substantial contention brought before this court in a note filed by the respondents herein.5. Section 4 of the Act of 1999 reads as under:'4. All proceedings relating to any order made or purported to be made under the prin...
Sunil Arvindbhai Kapadia Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-16-1999
Reported in: (2000)1GLR72
C.K. Buch, J.1. RULE. Learned Counsel Mr. B.T. Rao waives service of Rule for Respondents Nos. 1 & 3 and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. D.N. Patel for Respondent No. 2 State.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. At the admission stage learned advocates have agreed to dispose of this matter finally, hence the same is taken up for final hearing.3 The petitioner is an authorised person of one M/s. Swami Nana Exchange (P) Ltd. having its Registered Office at Nadiad of District Kheda. According to the petitioner, his father has expired. His one uncle Jitubhai Kapadia has also expired. He, his cousin brother (son of Jitubhai Kapadia) and his uncle Chimanbhai Harjivandas Kapadia are residing in a joint family. The joint family is headed by the petitioner's uncle Chimanbhai Harjivandas Kapadia. According to the petitioner, he, Himanshu (son of Chitubhai Kapadia) and daughtger-in-law of his uncle Chimanbhai H. Kapadia, Smt. Alkaben are authorised officers of M/s. Swami Nana Exchan...
A.P. Patel Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-16-1999
Reported in: (2000)2GLR23
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the short question which arises for determination and adjudication is whether the impugned order of the Government through the Under Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Housing Department dated 24.10.89 produced at Annexure. G to the petition is sustainable in law or not. 2. In order to examine and appreciate the merits of the aforesaid question which has been posed before this Court, let us have the skelton projection of material facts giving rise to this petition. The petitioner was working as an employee of the Panchayat. He had sought correction in his service record about his date of birth from 13.8.1929 to 13.8.1930 in view of the school record made at the relevant time in 1947. After perusing necessary papers, the respondent no. 2 District Development Officer held in favour of the petitioner and accordingly permitted to change the recording of the date of birth from 13.8.1929 to 13.8.1930 as requested o...
Govind Chhapabhai Patel Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-13-1999
Reported in: (1999)156CTR(Guj)353; [1999]240ITR628(Guj)
B.C. Patel, J. 1. The petitioner has approached this Court by invoking Art. 226 of the Constitution of India challenging notice dt. 28th August, 1995, Annexure 'A', issued by the respondent under s. 148 of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 2. Short facts as it emerges from the record are as under : 2.1. The petitioner filed his return of income for asst. yr. 1985-86 declaring total income at Rs. 5,000. Later on, a revised return was filed showing loss of Rs. 1,01,023. After scrutiny of the petitioner's case under s. 143(3) of the Act, an assessment order, Annexure 'B', came to be passed, which was challenged by preferring appeal before the CIT(A), which was pending at the relevant time. 2.2. On or about 17th December, 1990, the AO vide Annexure 'C', called upon the petitioner to furnish certain information which was sent by the petitioner on 6th March, 1991. The petitioner, in the return indicated long-term capital loss of Rs. 2,25,575. The cost of silver articles ...
Shree Sonal Gum Industries Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-13-1999
Reported in: [2001]247ITR735(Guj)
B.C. Patel, J.1. The petitioners, by this application, have prayed that the order dated February 2, 1994, passed by the Assistant Director of Income-tax (Prosecution)-II, Ahmedabad, vide annexure E, calling upon petitioner No. 1 to pay Rs. 47,658 as compounding fees, be quashed and set aside. It appears from the record placed before us that for the years 1975, 1976 and 1977, the amount of tax was deducted. However, the same was not deposited in accordance with the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act', for short). Petitioner No. 1 applied by letter dated April 17, 1989 (annexure B), for compounding the offences, after the prosecution was launched under Section 276B of the Act. It appears that the Assistant Director of Income-tax (Prosecution) accepted the request and by an order dated February 2, 1994, called upon petitioner No. 1 to pay the compounding fees.2. By the present application, it is also prayed to quash and set aside the sanction granted by respondent No. 2 for ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »