Gujarat Court March 2002 Judgments
Mardia Chemicals Limited Vs. Gujarat Electricity Board and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-2002
Reported in: AIR2002Guj404; (2002)2GLR1480; (2002)2GLR569
A.M. Kapadia, J. 1. In this Appeal from Order which is filed under Order 43, Rule 1(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure ('the Code' for short), appellant-Mardia Chemicals Limited a company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 ('the Companies Act' for short) seeks to challenge the order dated March 20, 2002 recorded below application Exh. 5 of Special Civil Suit No. 18 of 2002 by the learned 2nd Joint Civil Judge (S.D.)., Surendranagar by which application Exh. 5 seeking ad-interim injunction under the provisions of Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code filed by the appellant against the respondent-Gujarat Electricity Board ('G.E.B.' for short) - for restraining them from disconnecting the power connections bearing Consumer Nos. 17435 and 17447 in the Caustic Chlorine Plant of the appellant-Company situated in a backward area of Sayala Taluka of Surendranagar District, till disposal of the suit, came to be rejected. 2. Appellant is the original plaintiff whereas respon...
Tag this Judgment!Daxaben Nileshkumar Shah Vs. Nileshkumar Pravinchandra Shah and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-2002
Reported in: (2003)1GLR436
C.K. Buch, J.1. This Criminal Revision Application under Section 397 read with 401 of Cr.P.C., is filed by the petitioner-wife against the order dated 30-3-2001 passed by the Presiding Officer of Court No. 4, Family C6urt, Ahmedabad while dealing with Misc. Criminal Application No. 4333 of 2000. Initially, an application for maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., was filed in the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad on 30-11-1998, but on establishment of Family Court for the City of Ahmedabad, the said maintenance application pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate came to be transferred to the Family Court, Ahmedabad and numbered as Misc. Cri. Application No. 4333 of 2000.2. Respondent-husband, though served, did not appear before the Family Court and on the strength of the evidence led by the present petitioner-wife, vide order dated 30-11-1998, Family Court allowed maintenance application and granted maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month from th...
Tag this Judgment!Vishnubhai Ambalal Patel Vs. Shankerji Pnjjaji Thakore
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-2002
Reported in: (2001)4GLR3229
M.S. Shah, J.1. Both these petitions challenge two orders passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') under Section 76 of the Bombay Tenancy And Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'Tenancy Act') in respect of two adjoining parcels of land being block numbers 261 and 260 (respectively) admeasuring 1 acre and 38 gunthas and H.0-79 Ares 68 sqmts in village Kudasan of Taluka and District Gandhinagar purchased by the same petitioner from the same respondent under two separate registered sale deeds dated January 21, 1981.2. Since the provisions of Section 63 of the Tenancy Act impose a restriction that agricultural land cannot be sold in favour of a person who is not an agriculturist, the petitioner had relied upon the petitioner's possessing land bearing Survey No. 185 of village Memnagar in Taluka Ahmedabad City and District Ahmedabad which the petitioner was holding since 1960. However, the Mamlatdar and Agricultural Land Tribun...
Tag this Judgment!Mahendrabhai T. Kapadia Vs. Pritesh Dahyabhai Rathod
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-2002
Reported in: (2002)4GLR3217
C.K. Buch, J.1. Heard ld. counsel Ms. Vandana Bhatt for the petitioner, ld. counsel Mr. Rajesh Kanani for Respondent No. 1, and ld. APP Mr. B.D.Desai for Respondent No.2 State in all the matters. 2. On the strength of the complaint filed by the petitioner- original complainant, proceedings under Section 107 of CrPC were initiated by the Executive Magistrate, Metropolitan Area, Court No.2., Ahmedabad against the respondent No.1. In all five cases were registered by the ld. Executive Magistrate against the family members on account of some matrimonial dispute between husband Pritesh, S/o Dahyabhai Devji Rathod and wife Padmaben. It seems that some matrimonial disputes between them have cropped up in the year 1997. Because of the dispute, a criminal complaint being CR.No. I. 0003/99 came to be registered against (i) Dahyabhai Devjibhai Rathod, (ii) Sumanben, w/o Dahyabhai Devjibhai, (iii) Kaushikkumar Dahyabhai, and (iv) Priteshbhai Dahyabhai, with Saher Kotda Police Station, for the offe...
Tag this Judgment!Lakhiram Narandas Bawasadhu Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ585
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.1. This appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgement and order dated 31st May, 1997 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Banaskantha, at Palanpur, in Sessions Case No. 142 of 1996, by which the appellant is convicted under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (`NDPS Act' for short) and punished with imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of Rs. 1 lac (Rupees One lac Only), in default to undergo imprisonment for two years more.2. On 1st May, 1996, in the early morning at about 3.30 a.m. to 4.00 a.m., the then District Superintendent of Police called the Police Inspector (LCB), Shri Vyas, and Police Sub Inspector (LCB), Shri R.P. Patel, at his residence and informed them that in a temple of Lord Shiva at Village Sherpura-Dhani, one Lakhiram Narandas Sadhu is keeping opium. On receipt of the information from the District Superintendent of Police, the Police Inspector and Polic...
Tag this Judgment!Arjunbhai Mangabhai Nayak Vs. Rameshbhai Bhulabhai Nayak and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-26-2002
Reported in: (2002)3GLR473
D.S. Sinha, C.J.1. Heard Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Counsel appearing for Mr. Sunil Joshi, the Advocate on record representing the petitioner, at length and in detail.2. The order dated 20th February, 2002, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Halol, in Election Petition No. 3 of 2002, is under challenge in this Special Civil Application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution bf India.3. By the impugned order Election Petition filed by the petitioner under Sub-section (1) of Section 31 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1993, hereinafter called 'the Act', questioning the election of Mr. Rameshbhai Bhulabhai Nayak, the respondent No. 1, as a member of the Panchayat, has been dismissed as barred by time.4. Sub-section (1) of Section 31 of the Act reads thus : '31. Determination of validity of election, inquiry by Judge and procedure :-(1) If the validity of any election of a member of a Panchayat is brought in question by any person contesting the election or by any pe...
Tag this Judgment!Mercury Metals (P.) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-26-2002
Reported in: [2002]257ITR297(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. Admit. The following question of law is formulated.2. Has the Tribunal committed an error in exercise of its jurisdiction in setting aside the appellate order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) without taking into consideration the reasons for which that order was made ?3. At the request of learned counsel appearing for both the sides, since the matter involves a short point, it has been taken up for final disposal.4. The matter pertains to the assessment year 1990-91 for which the appellant had declared on October 21, 1991, a total income of Rs. 1,06,542. The assessment was, however, made on the income of Rs. 3,10,950. An addition of Rs. 2,27,832 was made by the Assessing Officer by that assessment on account of sales of scrap outside the books of account on the ground that the shortage/ wastage claimed by the appellant was more than the actual. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XII, Ahmedabad, allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the additi...
Tag this Judgment!Mercury Metals (P) Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Cit
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-26-2002
Reported in: [2002]122TAXMAN737(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J. Admit. The following question of law is fomlulated :'Has the Tribunal committed an error in exercise of its jurisdiction in setting aside the appellate order of Commissioner (Appeals) without taking into consideration the reasons for which that order was made?'2. At the request of the learned counsels appearing for both the sides, since the matter involves a short point, it has been taken up for final disposal.3. The matter pertains to the assessment year 1990-91 for which the appellant had declared on 21-10-1991, a total income of Rs. 1,06,542, The assessment was, however, made for the income of Rs. 3,10,950. An addition of Rs. 2,27,832 was made by the assessing officer by that assessment on account of sales of scrap outside the books of account on the ground that the shortage/wastage claimed by the appellant was more than the actual. The Commissioner (Appeals)-Xll, Ahmedabad, allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the addition of Rs. 2,27,832. The Tribunal par...
Tag this Judgment!Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Pratapsinhji Ramsinhji
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-22-2002
Reported in: [2002]255ITR365(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J. 1. This reference has been made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A', under Section 64 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, and the following questions of law are referred for the opinion of this court : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal rightly came to the conclusion that at the time of the death of the deceased Shri Karansinhji Fatehsinhji of Sagbara, no property passed which was part of the 'Sagbara Estate' and consequently no estate duty in respect thereof was payable (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal rightly held that the personal properties of the deceased Karansinhji Fatehsinhji also stood on the same footing as the estate of Sagbara and no property passed on the death of the deceased (3) Whether, the finding of the Appellate Tribunal that no property either on account of 'Sagbara Estate' or any personal property pa...
Tag this Judgment!Bhavnagar Municipal Nokariyat Sabha Vs. Bhavnagar Municipal Corporatio ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-22-2002
Reported in: (2002)3GLR127
D.H. Waghela, J.1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeks to challenge the award and order of the Industrial Tribunal, Rajkot in Reference (IT) Nos. 156 of 1984, 239 of 1984 and 255 of 1984, whereby, most of the demands and disputes referred to the Tribunal were resolved in favour of the workmen. Therefore, the Trade Union of the workmen appears to have filed this petition for the limited additional relief of higher pay-scales at par with the employees in the comparable categories in the main establishment of the respondent-Municipal Corporation and for advancing the date of application of the pay-scale.2. The facts essential to grasp the limited controversy are that the petitioner-Union approached the respondent in the year 1979, inter alia, with the demand of regularising the service of about 92 employees employed in the Urban Malaria Scheme run by the respondent. It appears that initially, in the year 1978, the employees in the Urban Malaria Scheme were e...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »