Gujarat Court June 2000 Judgments
Ashok Organics Industries Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-17-2000
Reported in: (2001)1GLR38
B. C. Patel, J. 1. Messrs. Gujchem Distillers India Limited, a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 is one of the petitioners in Special Civil Application Nos. 8877 of 1989 and 2916 of 1991. Messrs. Ashok Organics Industries Limited is one of the petitioners in Special Civil Application No. 6546 of 1991. In Special Civil Application No. 8877 of 1989, the relief which is claimed is as under :- '21. (A) to declare the impugned notification al Aimexure 'A' (Bombay Denatured Spirits (Guj. Amendment) Rules, 1988) to be illegal, unconstitutional, without jurisdiction, null, void and of no effect whatsoever from 25th October, 1989. They have also prayed for refund of vend fee collected, with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. 2. In Special Civil Application No. 2916 of 1991, the petitioners have challenged the Rules made in exercise of power conferred by clause (u) of sub-section (2) of Section 143 of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 read with the proviso to sub-section (3)...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat Vs. Dharmistaben Narendrasinh Rana
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-17-2000
Reported in: (2001)3GLR2056
M.R. Calla, J. 1. This Letters Patent Appeal filed by the State of Gujarat on 19th June, 1997 is directed against the judgment and order dated 21-2-1997 passed by the learned single Judge in Special Criminal Application No. 101 of 1996 (reported in 1997 (2) GLR 1043) whereby a direction was given for paymentof a sum of Rs. 2 lacs to the original petitioner, i.e., Dharmistaben Narendrasinh Rana, as a measure of interim compensation.2. The facts of the present case depict a dismal story of the death of Shri Narendrasinh Rana who was working as an Assistant Intelligence Officer in the establishment of Intelligence of the Police Department. At the relevant time, he was posted as Assistant Intelligence Officer at Lunawada, District Panchmahals, at Godhra. An application dated 11th January/19th January, 1996 addressed to the Chief Justice of this Court by one Dharmistaben, i.e., wife of deceased Narendrasinh Rana was received by post with the prayer that for the facts, reasons and grounds st...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat Vs. Bhikhabhai Jivabhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-17-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ1343; (2001)4GLR2871
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. By this appeal, appellant-State, has challenged the judgment and order of acquittal dated 24th December, 1992 recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar, in Sessions Case No.45/92, with the aids of the provisions of section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Code, for short).2. The respondents, who are accused persons, are relatives of the deceased, Damuben, aged about 30, when she committed suicide. Respondent No.1 is the father-in-law of the deceased, respondent No.2 is the elder brother of her husband, whereas, respondent No.3 is the husband of deceased, Damuben. The prosecution version has been that the deceased Damuben was, mentally, tortured and she was physically beaten by her husband, respondent No.3. She was also scolded and mentally tortured by her husband by calling her as mad-lady. Unfortunately, on 20.10.91 at about 11.30 a.m. she committed suicide. The prosecution case is that the deceased was compelled to commit suicide by the...
Tag this Judgment!Deputy Executive Engineer Vs. Jiviben V. Pandya
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-16-2000
Reported in: [2000(86)FLR841]
H.K. Rathod J.1. Learned Advocate Ms. Sejal K. Mandavia appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Learned Advocate Mr. D. M. Thakkar appearing on behalf of the Respondent. Rule Mr. D. M. Thakkar Learned Advocate on behalf of Respondent is waiving the service of rule. With the consent of both the Learned Advocates, the matter has been taken up for final hearing today. In the present petition, the award passed by the Labour Court, Surat in reference No. 266 of 1985 dated 8.10.1998 has been challenged wherein, the Labour Court, Surat has granted reinstatement with continuity of service with full back wages of interim period. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition are that the Respondent was appointed as a Clerk-cum-Typist with effect from 1.3.1982 on 29 days' basis and one or two days' artificial breaks were given and she remained in service up to 31.10.1983 and her service was terminated on 1.11.1983. The said termination order was challenged by the Respondent-workman ...
Tag this Judgment!Navalshanker Gaurishanker Thakar Vs. Mamlatdar and Prescribed Officer, ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-16-2000
Reported in: (2001)2GLR956
B.C. Patel, J.1. The petitioner, proprietor of one Hetal Snack Bar, has filed this petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The petitioner was assessed for entertainment tax for organising illegal Video shows in the aforesaid snack bar at village Una, Dist. Junagadh. Proceedings were initiated under Section 3, 3(3) and 9 of the Gujarat Entertainment Tax Act, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The petitioner was called upon as to why a sum of Rs. 23,607-50 towards entertainment tax as detailed in the notice issued earlier on 8-2-1984 should not be recovered for organising illegal video shows from 12-12-1983 to 31-1-1984. Despite giving notice and granting adjournment, the petitioner did not bother to remain present before the authority either personally or through any representative with any evidence. The petitioner has not availed of the opportunities granted to him. The Assessing Officer, i.e. the Mamlatdar and Prescribed Officer, considering the material placed...
Tag this Judgment!Regional Director, E.S.i. Corporation Vs. Accumax Ltd. Rajkot
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-16-2000
Reported in: [2001(88)FLR1025]; (2000)3GLR2212; (2001)ILLJ497Guj
M.R. Calla, J. 1. These two First Appeals involve common question of law based on identical facts, and therefore, I propose to decide both these Appeals by this common judgment and order. 2. First Appeal No. 296 of 1980 is directed against the judgment and order dated November 26, 1979 passed by the Employees' Insurance Court at Ahmedabad in Application (E.S.I.) No. 76 of 1974, declaring that the attendance bonus paid by the applicant to its workers under the scheme Annexure-A to Exh. 1 is not covered under the definition of the term 'wages' under Section 2(22) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 and the Employees' State Insurance Corporation was not entitled to recover from Accumax Ltd., Rajkot, the contributions with regard to the said amount paid by the applicant to its employees. 3. First Appeal No. 297 of 1980 is directed against the order dated September 24, 1978 passed by the Employees' Insurance Court, at Ahmedabad in Application (E.S.I.) No. 63 of 1973 whereby a simila...
Tag this Judgment!General Secretary, K.T. Kamdar Union Vs. Prashant Mukundray Mehta and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-16-2000
Reported in: [2001(89)FLR239]; (2002)IVLLJ471Guj
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties.The brief facts of the present writ petition are that, the petitioner is General Secretary ofK.T. Kamdar Union, Which is a registered Union under the provisions of Trade Unions Act, 1926 and its registration number is G-5732. On July 21, 1998, the petitioner has applied for registration of his Union under the provisions of Section 13(1), (2) and (3) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 to the Assistant Registrar, respondent No. 2, herein. However, the said application for registration came to be rejected by the respondent No. 2 on April 29, 1999.2. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the said order of rejection, the applicant preferred Special Civil Application No. 3749 of 1999 before this Court. The said Special Civil Application came to be allowed on August 4, 1999 by this Court (Coram D.C. SRIVASTAVA, J.) by directing the respondent No. 2 to grant necessary certificate to the petitioner within a period ...
Tag this Judgment!Dy. Executive Engineer Vs. Jayantibhai Chhimabhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-16-2000
Reported in: [2001(89)FLR446]
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Learned Advocate Ms. Sejal K. Mandavia appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Learned Advocate Mr. D.M. Thakker appearing on behalf of the resondent. Rule Mr. D.M. Thakker Learned Advocate on behalf of respondent is waiving the service of rule with the consent of both the Learned Advocates, the matter has been taken up for final hearing today. In the present petition, the award passed by the Labour Court, Surat in Reference No.62 of 1986 dated 14th October, 1998 has been challenged wherein, the Labour Court, Surat has granted reinstatement with continuity of service with full back wages of interim period. The respondent was appointed as a Seaman with effect from 14th August, 1980 and remained in service up to 29th September, 1982 and his service was terminated on 29th September, 1982. The said termination order was challenged by the respondent-workman before the Labour Court, Surat in Reference No. 62 of 1986. The statement of claim was filed by the respondent-work...
Tag this Judgment!Kusumben Chhaganlal Patel Vs. the Taluka Development Officer
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-16-2000
Reported in: (2000)4GLR389
B.C. Patel, J.1. The petitioner being aggrieved by the order made by the District Development Officer, District Panchayat, Valsad on 1.7.85 has preferred this petition invoking writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Short facts that emerge from the contentions raised in the petition are as under.2. The petitioner was appointed as work-charge clerk by an order dated 7.8.80 vide Annexure : A. Reading the order, it is very clear that the appointment was purely temporary and was liable to be terminated at anytime. Annexure : A, the order of appointment is made by the Taluka Development Officer, Pardi. It is contended by the petitioner that after the period of 4 and a half years, the Taluka Development Officer, by his order dated 30th April, 1985 passed an order at annexure : B whereby the services of the petitioner were terminated on the ground that the Taluka Panchayat Officer was not authorized to appoint Work-charge employees. The petitioner has ...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Aminaben Rahimbhai Kadiwala and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-14-2000
Reported in: 2003ACJ1096; (2001)2GLR1108
D.C. Srivastava, J. 1. This appeal, with the consent of the learned Advocates for the parties, can be finally disposed of at the admission stage.2. Shri Harit Bhatt, learned Counsel for the appellant and Shri M.T.M. Hakim, learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Shri M. P. Prajapati, learned Counsel for respondent No. 5 have been heard.3. The scope of inquiry in this appeal is very limited. Learned Counsel for the appellant has frankly conceded that the quantum of compensation cannot be challenged by the insurance company, the appellant. He has, however,contended that since the insurance company was impleaded before the Tribunal after about ten years, there can be no liability of the insurance company to pay interest from the date of the claim petition till it was impleaded. That is the only point which requires examination.Certain dates are material. The accident occurred on 2nd March, 1986. The claim petition was filed on 30th July, 1986. The appellant. Oriental Insurance Comp...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »