Gujarat Court September 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.
Manjulaben Wd/O Ramanlal Nathalal Vs. Gajiben Wd/O Ramanlal Purshottam
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-06-2000
Reported in: (2001)1GLR186
H.H. Mehta, J.1. This is a Civil Revision Application filed under Section 29(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel & Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (same will be referred to hereinafter as the Act for the sake of brevity and convenience), directed against the judgment Ex. 10 dated 22nd February, 1988 rendered by the Appellate Bench of the Court of Small Causes Court at Ahmedabad in Civil Appeal No. 209 of 1981 by which the Appellate Bench set aside the judgment Ex. 100 and decree dated 30th April, 1981 passed by the learned Judge, Court No. 7, Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad (who willbe referred to as learned Judge of the trial Court) in H.R.P. Suit No. 5083 of 1977.By allowing the said appeal, the learned Judges of the Appellate Bench, Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad allowed the appeal and decreed the suit in favour of the present revision opponents (plaintiffs) directing the revision petitioners (plaintiffs) to hand over the vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises to the plain...
Adani Exports Ltd. Vs. Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd. and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-06-2000
Reported in: (2000)3GLR2759
H.H. Mehta, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 104 of the Civil Procedure Code read with Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the Civil Procedure Code challenging an order dated 31st July, 2000 passed below Notice of Motion Ex. 6 in Civil Suit No. 2971 of 2000 by learned Auxi. Chamber Judge, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad (who will be referred to hereinafter as the learned Judge of the Trial Court).When this appeal was taken up for hearing at admission stage, both the parties submitted to this Court that this appeal be taken up for final hearing as if it is already admitted, and therefore, at the request of both the parties, this appeal is finally heard and decided and disposed of at admission stage.2. Here in this appeal, appellant is a plaintiff, while respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are defendant Nos. 1 and 2 respectively in Civil Suit No. 2971 of 2000 which is pending on the file of learned Judge of the Trial Court, and therefore, for the sake of convenience, parties will be referred to hereinafter as th...
Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation Vs. Vijay Owners Association
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-06-2000
Reported in: (2000)3GLR2505
B.C. Patel, J.1. Against the order made by the Auxilliary Chamber Judge ( Court No. 24), Ahmedabad on 8.7.98, this appeal is preferred by Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Corporation').2. Respondent (hereinafter referred as 'plaintiff') Vijay Owners' Association Non Trading Corporation filed a Civil Suit No. 4980/94 against the Corporation for urgent orders. Notice of Motion was filed by the plaintiff for temporary injunction restraining the Corporation from implementing decision dated 12.8.94 and also restraining the Corporation, its agents, servants and persons from demolishing the construction till the final disposal of the suit. The learned Auxilliary Chamber Judge made an order below exh. 6 on 8.7.98, directing the parties to maintain status quo. The original plaintiff was also directed to file an undertaking that it would not carry out any further construction work in the disputed property till disposal of the suit and subject to that, tempor...
Bank of Baroda Vs. Nutan Mills Employees Co-operative Credit Society L ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-06-2000
Reported in: [2003]115CompCas207(Guj); [2004]50SCL6(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The applicant has prayed for stay of the operation of the impugned order made on September 30, 1999 (since reported in Nutan Mills Employeees Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. v. Official Liquidator of Nutan Mills Ltd. [2001] 104 Comp Cas 439 (Guj)) by the learned company judge. Ad interim relief was granted on November 4, 1999, in terms of paragraph 18(a) in which the stay was prayed for. The learned company judge on an application which was made by the credit society of the workmen gave a direction to the official liquidator to pay the amount in question to the credit society from the funds available with him before he undertakes the exercise of distribution of the proceeds realised by disposing of the assets of the mill company. 2. The grievance of the appellant is that the amount which was deducted from the wages of the workmen for the purpose of repayment of the loan advanced to them by the credit society would at best rank pari passu with the dues of the sec...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shashi theatre (P) Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-05-2000
Reported in: [2001]248ITR126(Guj)
D.M. Dharmadhikari, C.J. 1. In this reference under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, at the instance of the Department, the following two questions have been referred for answer by this Court : '1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT was not correct in law in withdrawing the allowance granted by the ITO under power given in s. 263 of the IT Act, 1961 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in taking the view that ITO's order had merged in the appellate order and, therefore, the revision order could not be passed ?' 2. The factual background leading to the above reference is as under : The assessee has taxable income from business of running theatre in the name and style of Shashi Theatres (P) Ltd., Mehsana. In his return for the asst. yr. 1980-81, he claimed investment allowance under s. 32A of the IT Act for the following items : Items Rs. (1) Plaster of paris 48,043 (2) Machinery 1,60,831 (3) A. C. plant 40,089 (...
Peoples Union for Civil Liberties and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat and or ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-05-2000
Reported in: (2001)1GLR547
D.M. Dharmadhikari, C.J. 1. This writ petition as also the connected writ petitions (Spl.C.A. Nos. 2251, 2255, 3172, 3185, 4041 and 4384 of 1999 and Spl.C.A. No. 4202 of 1995) have been filed as Public Interest Litigations by voluntary service-oriented organisations, namely, Peoples' Union of Civil Liberties, Shishu Milap, Samvad, Council of Social Justice and a few individuals for and on behalf of hutment dwellers. They seek directions for their resettlement and for payment of compensation to them for their forcible removal in violation of their constitutional and human right. 2. The petitioners who have approached individually and for and on behalf of the hutment dwellers do not dispute that the land on which they were living in their huts were public properties, belonging to the State of Gujarat and within the control of either the Municipal Corporations, Urban Development Authorities or the Housing Boards at Ahmedabad and Vadodara. 3. On behalf of hutment dwellers, it is complained...
Lalubhai Hirabhai Patel and anr. Vs. Indo-japan Industries and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-05-2000
Reported in: (2001)3GLR2254
H.H. Mehta, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 104(1) of C.P.C. read with Order 43, Rule l(r) of C.P.C., filed by the original defendant Nos. 2 and 3 in Special Civil Suit No. 39 of 1994, challenging an order dated 15-3-1995, passed below Exh. 5 in Special Civil Suit No. 39 of 1994, at present, pending on the file of 2nd Jt. Civil Judge (S.D.), Bhavnagar (who will be referred to hereinafter as the learned Judge of the trial Court). 2. Here in this appeal, the appellants are the original defendant Nos. 2 and 3 while respondent No. 1 is a plaintiff in that suit. Respondent Nos. 2/a and 2/b are the heirs and legal representatives of original defendant No. 1 in the aforesaid suit, and therefore, parties will be referred to hereinafter as the plaintiff and defendants respectively at appropriate places. 3. The facts leading to this appeal in a nutshell are as follows :3.1 Till 29-4-1983, plaintiff was a Power of Attorney-Holder of defendant No. 1-Dr. Virbhadrasinhji Gohil. On or about 21-...
Parshottam Manilal Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-05-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ1354; (2001)3GLR1897
D.C. Srivastava, J.1. These two Criminal Revisions challenging the same order of the Addl. Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Gandhinagar, dated 24-5-1999 can be disposed of by a common order.2. Criminal Revision Application No. 348 of 1999 was filed by the complainant, namely, the first informant, who is father of the prosecutrix. The Second Revision No. 374 of 1999 has been filed by the State of Gujarat challenging the same order.3. Shri M. A. Bukhari, learned A.P.P., for the State has been heard and the impugned order has been examined. He has also brought to my notice the statement of the prosecutrix.4. The request of the prosecutor before the Addl. Sessions Judge was that additional charge under Section 376 Indian Penal Code be framed against the accused Dharmendrakumar Tejpal Shah. None has appeared on his behalf though he has been served. This application of the prosecution was rejected by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge on the ground that contradictory stand has been taken b...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Arvind Mills Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-05-2000
Reported in: [2001]248ITR187(Guj)
D.M. Dharmadhjkarj, C.J.1. In the case of the present assessee for the assessment year 1978-79, the following questions of law under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, have been referred to us for answer : '(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled in law to the allowance of Rs. 2,33.300 being royalty paid to Mettur Beardsell Ltd., as claimed ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to allowance of Rs. 7,771 being reimbursement of medical expenses paid to the managing director ? (iii) Whether the Tribunal has been right in law in sustaining the deletion of disallowance of Rs. 8,969 in respect of guest house expenses and directing allowance of depreciation on dead stock and furniture ?' 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Department and the assessee submit that question No. 1 has been squarely covered by the decision of this court in the case of CIT v. Ashoka Mills Ltd. [1996] 218...
Vadhwan Mahajan Panjarapole Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-05-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ897; (2000)4GLR685
D.C. Srivastava, J.1. List has been revised thrice, none appeared for the revisionist. Shri K.C.Shah, learned A.P.P. for the respondent No.1 and Shri A.R.Shaikh, learned Counsel for the respondent No.2 have been heard and the impugned order has been examined.2. It appears from the impugned order that 17 calves were seized and inquiry and investigation under Section 35(2) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 was initiated against the respondent No.2. The respondent No.2 claiming to be the owner of the cattle claimed interim custody. Application for interim custody was rejected by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surendranagar through his order dated 13.4.1998, and the calves were given in the custody of Vadhwan Mahajan Panjarapole, Vadhawan, a Charitable Trust registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act. This Panjarapole is revisionist before me. Feeling aggrieved the respondent No.2 herein approached the Sessions Judge, Surendranagar, who set aside the order of the Chief Ju...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »