Gujarat Court July 2001 Judgments
Dolat Industries Vs. Krishna Oil Industries
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-19-2001
Reported in: (2001)3GLR2308
J.R. Vora, J.1. This appeal is filed by the original plaintiff against the order passed below Exh. 5 in Regular Civil Suit No. 1 of 2000 on 31st August, 2000 by Jt. District Judge, Jamnagar. The present respondents are original defendants.2. Present appellant filed Regular Civil Suit No. 1 of 2000 in the Court of District Judge at Jamnagar stating that the plaintiff is a partnership firm, engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling edible oils including groundnut oil since 1984 in the name and style of 'Dolat Industries'. The plaintiff is registered with Sales Tax Department, etc. The plaintiff has adopted his brand name as 'EKKA' for selling groundnut oil. According to plaintiff, this is the mark which is distinctive and unique trade mark which displays the picture of 'Four Aces'. According to the case of the plaintiff having the device of Four Aces with unique layout, get-up and colour scheme started using the same by affixing on the tins of such groundnut oil since 1986. Th...
Tag this Judgment!i.S.P.L. Industries Ltd. Vs. S.J. Mehta and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-19-2001
Reported in: [2003]115CompCas726(Guj)
Ravi, R. Tripathi, J. 1. Rule. Mr. A.K. Clerk, learned advocate for the respondent, waives service of rule. 1.1 With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today. 2. The present petition is filed by I.S.P.L. Industries Limited, challenging the order dated 14 June, 2001, passed by the Labour Court, Rajkot, allowing the Recovery Application Nos. 251/2000 to 425/2000, 428/2000 and 430/2000 to 433/2000. 3. Mr. A.K. Clerk, learned advocate appearing for the respondent, raised preliminary objection that single petition is not maintainable challenging the order passed inthe aforesaid recovery applications. Mr. K.S. Nanavati, learned advocate appearingfor the petitioner, undertakes to file other 179 petitions in the respective recovery applications. 4. The case of the present petitioner is that the petitioner-company, which is engaged in the business of manufacturing parts used by the automobile and steel industries, for last so many years, sustained huge losses f...
Tag this Judgment!National Wire Manufacturing Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-19-2001
Reported in: (2001)171CTR(Guj)376; [2002]253ITR496(Guj)
D.A. Mehta, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B', has referred the following common question for two assessment years : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the remuneration paid to two individual partners was disallowable under Section 40(b) even though they were partners as karta of their respective Hindu undivided families ?'The assessment years are 1980-81 and 1981-82, the respective accounting periods being calendar years 1979 and 1980, respectively. The applicant asses-see is a registered firm consisting of the following three partners :(1) Shri K.J. Patel. (2) Shri Natvarlal Patel (HUF). (3) Shri Rajnikant Patel (HUF).Shri Natvarlal and Shri Rajnikant were partners in their representative capacity inasmuch as they represented the interest of their respective Hindu undivided family (HUF) in the said firm. Both Shri Natvarlal and Shri Rajnikant were paid salary of Rs. 15,000 per annum. For...
Tag this Judgment!Khimjibhai Nagjibhai Parmar Vs. District Magistrate
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-19-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ686
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard Mr. P.S. Gondalia learned adfvocate for the petitioner, Mr. H.L. Jani learned AGP for the respondents nos 1, 2 and 3 and Ms. P.J. Davawala learned advocate for the respondent no. 3.2. In this petition the petitioner has challenged the order of detention dated 21.2.2001 under section 226 of the Constitution of India. The order of detention has been passed by the District Magistrate, Jamnagar under the provisions of section 3(2) of Prevention of Black Marketing and Supply of Essential Commodities Act (hereinafter referred to as the said Act.) Present petitioner has been detained in Central Jail, Baroda as a class-II detenu. The grounds of detention has been communicated and supplied to the petitioner by the detaining authority. The respondent State Government as detaining authority has not filed any reply though on behalf of respondent no. 3 the Union of India has filed affidavit in reply which has been taken on record.3. Mr. Gondalia learned advocate appearing fo...
Tag this Judgment!Navjivan Oil Mills Vs. Cit
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-19-2001
Reported in: (2001)170CTR(Guj)224
D.A. Mehta, J.The Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, 'B' has referred the following two questions for the opinion of this court.'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming levy of penalty of Rs. 10,400 imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.(2) Whether, the Tribunal was justified in invoking Explanation to section 271(1)(c) and in holding that the additions in question were not covered by proviso to section 145 of the Act ?'2. The assessee is a registered firm. The assessment year is 1973-74 and the relevant accounting period is S.Y. 2028. On 28-8-1973, the return of income showing total income of Rs. 27,213 was filed by the assessee-firm.3. It appears that on 10-12-1971 the ST Department conducted the search and seizure proceedings at the business premises of the assessee-firm and seized various articles. According to the Income Tax Officer the most important item in the seized material was item No. 9 which con...
Tag this Judgment!Mohanbhai Jivanbhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-19-2001
Reported in: (2002)4GLR3365
B.C. Patel, J.1. Appellant being aggrieved by an order made against him by the Sessions Judge, Valsad at Navsari on 15.4.96, convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part I of Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months, has preferred the present appeal.2. It seems that the appellant preferred an appeal through jail also and the said appeal has been numbered as Criminal Appeal No. 355/96. Brief facts leading to the present prosecution in nutshell are as under.3. Kantilal - P.W. 1 - father of deceased who was working in Loco Shed at Udhna was returning after job hours on 13.4.94 and was near Police Station at about 8.30 p.m. He was proceeding towards his home on foot. While he was at Suki Talavadi, one person known as Paresh met him and conveyed the information that Suresh ( son of the informant) has sustained injuries...
Tag this Judgment!Surat Textile Market Co-op. Shops and Warehousing Society Ltd. Vs. Com ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-18-2001
Reported in: (2002)1GLR633
M.S. Shah, J.1. The petitioner is a Co-operative Society running a textile market in the city of Surat. The market building is situate on the Ring Road. In front of the building, the open land of the width of 22 feet is kept open. The Municipal Commissioner of Surat Municipal Corporation issued notice dated 15-10-1999 (Annexure 'A') informing the petitioner-Society that as per Section 213 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as 'the B.P.M.C. Act'), the Surat Municipal Corporation had resolved to acquire 360.25 sq. mtrs. of land of Final Plot No. 141 Paiki + 142 Paiki of Town Planning Scheme No. 8 (Umarwada) with alignment line falling on the road and with anything on it. The petitioner-Society was therefore, required to hand over possession of such land to the Town Planner failing which the Corporation will take appropriate steps at the petitioner's expense. The Corporation further informed the petitioner that the value of the property was ...
Tag this Judgment!Larsen and Toubro Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-18-2001
Reported in: [2001]124STC162(Guj)
D.M. Dharmadhikari, C.J.1. The petitioner-Larsen and Toubro Limited is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and a leading engineering concern. It undertakes works contracts of different nature. It entered into a contract with National Dairy Development Board, Anand (respondent No. 3) for setting up automated dairy plant at Banas II Dairy on August 25, 1999 for a total value of Rs. 28,82,05,360 which is now increased, with additional works, to Rs. 29,09,51,966 on the terms and conditions contained in the document of contract.2. During the course of works contract, the petitioner-company submitted its bills periodically for payment to its employer, viz., National Dairy Development Board. The department insisted on deducting 2 per cent on the amounts payable for the works executed under various bills in accordance with the impugned provisions contained in Section 57B of Chapter VA inserted by Gujarat Act No. 15 of 1997 with effect from April 1, 1997 to Gujarat Sales Tax Act,...
Tag this Judgment!Kanubhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-18-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ320
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Sanjanwala for the petitioner and the learned AGP Mr. Jani for the respondents. In this petition under Article 226 of the the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order of detention dated 12th December, 2000 passed by the District Magistrate, Valsad whereunder the petitioner has been ordered to be detained at the Porbandar Jail as Class II detenu. According to the grounds of detention communicated to the petitioner under section 9(1) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, the petitioner has been considered as bootlegger as defined u/s. 2(b) of the PASA Act and in all, ten offences have been registered against the petitioner wherein the petitioner has been enlarged on bail in respect of each registered offences. It is pertinent to note that no statement of the secret witness has been recorded by the detaining authority. Looking to the facts of the offence registered against the petitioner, the pe...
Tag this Judgment!Naresh Alias Lalo Babubhai Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-18-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1195
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard Ms. S.G. Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr.H.L.Jani, learned AGP for the respondents.2. In the present petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of detention dated 27th December, 2000 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The order of detention has been passed by the Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad City under Section 3(1) of the PASA Act. The grounds of detention are communicated and supplied to the petitioner under Section 9(1) of the PASA Act. The petitioner has been detained in Jamnagar Jail as Class II detenu. The petitioner has been considered as the bootlegger under Section 2(b) of the PASA Act. That one offence has been registered against the present petitioner at Meghaninagar Police Station vide C.R. No.5307 / 2000 dated 24th December, 2000. The statements of the secret witnesses are recorded on 24th December, 2000 and 25th December, 2000 and the same are verified by the detaining authority on 26th Dece...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »