Gujarat Court October 2000 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.
State of Gujarat Vs. Manoharsinhji Pradyumansinhji Jadeja
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-11-2000
Reported in: (2001)GLR776
M.R. Calla, J.1. The State of Gujarat has come in appeal against the judgment and order dated 6th May 1999 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.4015 of 1990 whereby the petition was allowed and the judgment and order dated 8th September 1989 passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in Revision Application No.TEN.B.R.4 of 1989 confirming the orders at Annexures.A and B in Special Civil Application as had been passed by the Dy.Collector, Mamlatdar and ALT in so far as the bid land Survey No.111/2 admeasuring 30 acres and 30 gunthas and Survey No. 111/3 admeasuring 529 acres and 27 gunthas are concerned was quashed and set aside and the Rule was made absolute.2. The controversy between the parties hinges around the provisions of the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act, 1960 and the amendment made therein vide Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling (Amendment) Act, 1972 and the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 and the Urban Land (Ce...
Chimanlal Manjibhai Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-11-2000
Reported in: (2001)4GLR3172
A.L. Dave, J.1. The present appeal is preferred against judgment and order of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar, dated March 30, 1990, passed in Sessions Case No. 68 of 1988, convicting the accused-appellant under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment.2. The facts of the case, in a narrow compass, can be stated thus:2.1 The accused-appellant was married to Ushaben, the deceased. Prior to the marriage with the accused, Ushaben was married to one Himatlal, from whom she had obtained divorce. The deceased and Chimanlal were staying in Gadhada in Bhavnagar district in a house belonging to the father of the deceased. On the 10th June, 1988, mother of deceased-Ushaben and her sister came to the house of the accused and they had their meal in the afternoon. Since the mother of the deceased (complainant) was not feeling well, she and her sister went to a doctor. They left the house at about 4-30 p.m. After consulting the doctor, they return...
Mahesh Ratilal Modi and ors. Vs. Anandben Indrajitsinh Chauhan and ors ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-10-2000
Reported in: (2001)IILLJ691Guj
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. The sole question which has been raised by the appellant-original opponent No. 1, is with regard to liability of payment of penalty payable under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as the Act') for late depositing the amount of compensation due and payable on happening of employment injuries to the employee.2. It may be mentioned, at the outset, that the scope of appeal under Section 30 of the Act, is very much circumscribed. An appeal is competent against the order of Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation on a substantial question of law. The question raised in this appeal by the employer is with regard to his right to be reimbursed from the insurer respondent No. 3, National Insurance Company, for the payment of penalty. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation has, only, directed the employer and not the insurer for payment of penalty which is challenged before us. It is settled proposition of law that the Insurance Company cannot be ...
G.S.R.T.C. Vs. Sushmaben Surendrasinh Ravat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-10-2000
Reported in: II(2001)ACC213; (2001)4GLR3467
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. Both these appeals arise out of common judgementarising out of common accident. Therefore, they are being disposed of by this common judgement by us.2. The appellant in both these appeals is original opponent No. 2, Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation and owner of the bus bearing registration No. GRU 6952 involved in the accident which was driven by original opponent No. 1. On 13.12.1987 there was an accident at about 11.15 a.m. The said offending S.T. bus dashed against scooter bearing registration No. GJJ 2475 which was proceeding from Ahmedabad to Baroda. The deceased Nandansinh Mohansinh and his deceased friend Surendrasinh Jagatsinh were proceeding on the scooter. The scooter was driven by the deceased Surendrasing whereas his friend Nandansinh was sitting on pillion. The offending S.T. bus coming from opposite direction dashed against the scooter near Sarsa road on Ahmedabad-Baroda highway. The impact of the S.T. bus was so violent that the scooter was dragg...
National Textiles Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-09-2000
Reported in: (2001)164CTR(Guj)209
D. M. Dharmadhikari, C. J.At the instance of the assessee, out of many questions proposed, only the following questions have been referred under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act.'1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in confirming the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act to the extent of Rs. 90,000 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the ratio laid down by the Gujarat High Court judgment in the case of CIT v. Lakhdhir Lalji : [1972]85ITR77(Guj) was not applicable even when the Commissioner (Appeals) had telescoped the two additions in question in the quantum appeal ?6. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the explanation offered by the assessee had 'a ring of a convenient excuse and not a right of truth' ?7. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tri...
Sardar Patel Nagar Co-op. Development Mandal Vs. State of Gujarat and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-06-2000
Reported in: (2001)2GLR1048
P.B. Majmudar, J.1. Petitioner is a Co-operative Society (hereinafter referred to as 'the Society') registered under the provisions contained in the Co-operative Societies Act, and is known as Sardar Patel Nagar Co-operative Development Mandal. The members of the said Society are the residents of the locality known as Sardar Patel Nagar.2. Respondent No. 2 in this petition is Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, - A.M.C., for brevity hereinafter-, Respondent No. 3 is Deputy Estate Officer of A.M.C., and respondent No. 5 is Nest Hotel Pvt. Ltd. By filing this petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 notto grant permission to the respondent No. 5 for making use of the said premises other than the purpose for which it is reserved. The petitioner has further prayed for direction against the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to submit a report indicating whether the respondent No. 5 has put up construction in accordance with the provisions of the building by-laws...
Jyotindra C. Shah Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-06-2000
Reported in: [2002(92)FLR114]; (2002)1GLR121
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioner challenges the order of punishment passed against him pursuant to the departmental proceedings and the order made by the Appellate Authority to the extent to which it confirms the findings and order of the Disciplinary Authority.2. The petitioner who was serving as a Development Officer with the respondent-Insurance Company at Wadhwan was charged on 28-3-1988 for the alleged misconduct of having issued Fire Temporary Cover Note for Rs. 3 lakhs on 4-4-1985, covering cotton bales stock, which was lying in the open compound of the factory after the stock was already destroyed by fire. In his defence, the petitioner had taken up a stand that he had left the Cover Note on the table of the concerned Assistant at about 1-15 p.m. and that Cover Note was examined by the Assistant at 2-15 p.m. and that since the tire had taken place at about 2-15 p.m, the risk was accepted well before the occurrence and thatthere was no intention on his part to have favoured...
Gujarat Housing Board and anr. Vs. Arvind C. Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-06-2000
Reported in: (2002)1GLR153
M.S. Shah, J. 1. Rule. Mr. B. S. Patel waives service of rule for the respondent. With consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal today. 2. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the Gujarat Housing Board has challenged the judgment and order dated 31-7-2000 passed by the Gujarat State Public Works Contract Disputes Tribunal (hereinafter referred toas 'the Tribunal') constituted under the provisions of Gujarat Public Works Contract Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') rejecting Arbitration Reference No. 13 of 1999 only on the ground that the reference is not maintainable as the Gujarat Housing Board is not a public undertaking within the meaning of Section 2(1) of the Act. 3. The petitioner-Gujarat Housing Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board') had given a work contract to the respondent herein for construction of 48 H.I.G. tenements at Nagarvada, Vadodara. The tender was a...
Regional Director, Employees' State Insurance Corporation Vs. Babubhai ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-05-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Guj169; [2001(91)FLR775]
M.R. Calla, J. 1. All these 109 Letters Patent Appeals are directed against the common judgment and order dated 26-10-1999 passed by the learned single Judge in First Appeals Nos. 3949 to 3502 of 1999 and First Appeals Nos. 4581 to 4605 (25), 4608 to 4626(19), 5093 to 5095 (3), 5098 to 5100(3) and 5103 to 5107 (5) of 1999 and, therefore, we propose to decide all these Letters Patent Appeals by this common judgment and order. 54 Letters Patent Appeals (1853 to 1906 = 54) have been filed by the Regional Director of E.S.I. against the rejection of the First Appeals preferred by the Corporation and 55 Letters Patent Appeals (1910 to 1964 = 55) have been filed against the allowing of the First Appeals preferred by the employees.2. In the Crushing Plant of Alembic Glass Industries Limited of Vadodara, the employees, who were covered under the E.S.I. Scheme, suffered disability; extent of such disability and loss of earning capacity was decided by the Medical Board as a First Forum in 1984, 1...
Kiritkumar Budhalal Patel Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-05-2000
Reported in: (2001)GLR55
D.C. Srivastava, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated September 26, 1997 of 2nd Jt.Civil Judge (J.D.) & J.M.F.C., Gandhinagar, rejecting the application of the revisionist for dropping proceedings initiated against him under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.2. Shri BP Gupta, learned counsel for the revisionist and Shri KC Shah, learned APP have been heard.3. The application (Annexure-B) was moved by the revisionist before the trial Magistrate that, since the revisionist was being prosecuted for misbranding tobacco and since the rule relating to misbranding, as contained in rule 32(e) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules has been declared by the Apex Court in Dwarka Nath v. Delhi Municipality AIR 1971 S.C. p.1844 as ultra vires, the proceedings against the revisionist were liable to be dropped, and since the learned Magistrate did not do so, he committed illegality, requiring interference in this revision. The impugned order shows that the learned Magist...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »