Gujarat Court August 2002 Judgments
Nilesh Lalit Parekh Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-16-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ1018; (2003)2GLR1323
A.M. Kapadia, J. 1. In this batch of six petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code' for short), the petitioner against whom six separate complaints, being Criminal Case Nos. 340 of 2000, 668 of 1999, 341 of 2000, 657 of 2000, 659 of 2000 and 658 of 2000 filed in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Vadodara by the respondent No. 2 herein for commission of the alleged offences under Sections 406, 420, 120B and 114 of the I.P.C., and the process issued thereunder, has prayed to quash and set aside the said complaints and process issued thereunder.2. Since common question of law and fact is involved in this batch of petitions, by the consent of the learned Advocates appearing for the parties, all the petitions have been heard together and decided by this common judgment and order.3. In order to appreciate the controversies raised in this batch of petitions, it would be advantageous to refer to the facts stated in Misc. Criminal Application No. 7227 of 2002 w...
Tag this Judgment!Ramchandra Art Silk Yarn Trading Co. and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: 2003(85)ECC124; 2002LC39(Gujarat)
M.S. Shah, J.1. Rule. Mr. D.N. Patel, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Central Govt. Waives service of Rule.2. Petitioners imported Mixed Denier Flat Poly Yarn, B Grade at the Kandla Port in February 2000. The petitioners filed, Bill of Entry on 1st February, 2000 through their Customs House Agent for clearance of imported goods for home consumption. The petitioners supplied import documents like Bill of Lading, Invoice issued by foreign supplier, Packing List etc., along with the above Bill of Entry. The Deputy Commissioner, Customs, Kandla directed the petitioners and Customs House Agent on 14th February 2002 to segregate the yarns on the basis of weights and deniers on quantification. The petitioners and their agent contended that such separation or segregation was not possible nor was it required under the Customs Act and the assessment of the goods is to be made in the condition in which the goods were imported. However, since the Customs Authorities stuck to their stand th...
Tag this Judgment!Shreeji Traders Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: 2003(160)ELT67(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J. 1. Rule. Mr. D.N. Patel, learned Senior Standing Counsel waives service of Rule for the respondents. 2. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 30-3-2001 passed by Respondent No. 3, Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Bhavnagar at Annexure 'A' to the petition. 3. The facts leading to filing of this petition, briefly stated, are as under :-Petitioner No. 1 is a partnership firm engaged in the business of ship breaking. Petitioner No. 2 is one of its partners. The petitioners had imported four ships for which four Bills of Entry were filed. The said Bills of Entry were assessed provisionally for determination of the correct and proper clarification of various items on board of the ships. Petitioner No. 1 had executed necessary bond and made payment of customs duties. According to the petitioners, respondent No. 4 herein, the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhavnagar passed final assessment orders without ...
Tag this Judgment!Veraval Seva Sahakari Mandali Ltd. Vs. Bhimjibhai Harjibhai and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-12-2002
Reported in: (2003)1GLR305
Jayant Patel, J. 1. Draft amendment is allowed. Rule. Mr. Mangukia learned Advocate appears and service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent No. 1 and Ms. Harsha Devani, learned A.G.P. appears and waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 to 4, in all three matters. 2. In all these three petitions, common questions are involved, and therefore, they are being dealt with together. 3. The present petitions are preferred against the order dated 6-12-2001 passed by the Additional Registrar(Appeals), whereby registration granted to the petitioner society is cancelled. The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the State Government dated 30-4-2002 in exercise of revisional jurisdiction whereby the order dated 6-12-2001 passed by the Additional Registrar (Appeals) is confirmed. 4. The short facts of the case are that Santhali Juth Seva Sahakari Mandali Ltd. was registered under the provisions of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter refer...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation and anr. Vs. Mayurkumar I. Sh ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: (2003)1GLR554; (2003)IILLJ407Guj
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. The appellant-Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Ltd. (G.S.R.T.C.) has assailed the award of the Labour Court granting reinstatement to the respondent-workman and confirmed by the learned single Judge in writ petition by order, dated 7-1-2002 by invoking the aids of the provisions of Clause 15 of the Letters Patent.2. Short skeleton, factual profile relevant and material for the issue in controversy may be at the outset highlighted with a view to appreciate the merits and challenge against the appeal. The respondent was initially appointed as a Clerk in the year 1968 who came to be promoted in the year 1976 as Junior Accountant, and thereafter, he came to be promoted in the cadre of Senior Accountant in the year 1996. He came to be transferred from Rajkot to Jhagadia in November, 1997.3. The appellant-Corporation inter alia alleged that the respondent was involved in financial irregularities by way of claiming impermissible medical bills of the son who was an ear...
Tag this Judgment!Digvijay Cement and Asbestos Mazdoor Sabha Vs. State of Gujarat and an ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: (2003)2GLR992; (2003)ILLJ795Guj
Kundan Singh, J. 1. The appellant-original petitioner filed Special Civil Application No. 1826 of 2002 for a direction to the respondent No. 1 State of Gujarat through Labour Commissioner, Ahmedabad to take appropriate action to restore the service conditions which were prevailing in the respondent No. 2 company before 31st October, 2001 and to initiate appropriate action pursuant to the breach of statutory rules and regulations restraining the respondents from committing any further breach of statutory rules and regulations. 2. It is asserted in the petition that the petitioner is a registered Trade Union operating in the respondent No. 2-Company for about 30 years and the respondent No. 2-Company started manufacturing activities at Ranip about 40 years ago. On 16th October, 2001 the respondent-Company alleged to have issued a notice to its workmen regarding financial crisis in the company, but actually no notice was made known to the majority of the workmen and also to the petitioner...
Tag this Judgment!Director General of Police and ors. Vs. Husen Alias Gaha
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: (2002)4GLR3559
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.1. The present Second Appeal is preferred challenging the judgment and Order dated 26th April, 1991 passed by the learned Joint District Judge, Bhavnagar, in Civil Reg. Appeal No. 141 of 1984, whereby the Court was pleased to pass the following Order:The suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and it is declared that the defendants are bound to give appointment to the plaintiff for the post of electrician in the scale of Rs. 350-560 with effect from January, 1981 and defendants are also bound to give seniority to the plaintiff for the said post from January, 1981 and defendants are also bound to give all the benefits incidental to the said post to the plaintiff with effect from January, 1981.The defendants are further directed to give appointment to the plaintiff in the post of electrician as per their Advertisement and interview held in January, 1981 within 14 days from today, and treat him in the continuous service as electrician from January, 1981 and give him...
Tag this Judgment!Navinchandra Jasani and ors. Vs. Pravinchandra Jasani and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-07-2002
Reported in: (2003)1GLR392
Jayant Patel, J. 1. The short facts of the case are the petitioners are the Trustees of Shri Veraval Dashashrimali Vanik Gnati (hereinafter referred to as the 'Trust'). Respondent Nos. 1 to 11 made an application to the JointCharity Commissioner under Section 41A of the Bombay Public Trusts Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on 24-1-1989 contending that the applicants who are respondents herein and other members of 70 families since generations are residing in Veraval and on account of the business, service and/or other circumstances they are required to go outside Veraval and it is also contended that there are other natives of Veraval who are required to stay outside Veraval City for professional purpose. It was stated in the application that they had applied for becoming the members of the Trust. However, the said memberships are denied, and therefore, the powers were made for treating them at par with the other members of the Trust and to restrain the Trustees from applican...
Tag this Judgment!Vajiben Medhabhai Vs. Junagadh Nagarpalika
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-07-2002
Reported in: (2003)4GLR862
P.B. Majmudar, J. 1. Rule returnable today. Ms. Nanavaty, learned Advocate, appears and waives service of rule on behalf of the Junagadh Nagarpalika and Ms.Punani, learned AGP, appears and waives service of rule on behalf of respondent No.2.2. By filing this petition, the petitioner has prayed that the respondent-Nagarpalika may be directed to implement the Resolution dated 29th April, 2001, which is at Annexure 'C', page 11. The petitioner is the employee of the respondent No.1-Junagadh Nagarpalika. She gave an application on 5.4.1999 and by the said application, it was requested by her that because of her old age and indifferent health, she wants to retire voluntarily from the employment and the post which may fall vacant in view of her resignation, may be offered to her daughter-in-law, one Urmilaben Bipinbhai Jethwa. She has further stated in her application that till her daughter-in-law is appointed in the said post, she will continue on her post. Mr.Kakkad for the petitioner subm...
Tag this Judgment!Vipor Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-06-2002
Reported in: 2002(146)ELT511(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.1. Rule, Mr. D.N. Patel, learned Sr. Standing Counsel waives service of rule on behalf of the respondents. 2. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged the action of the respondent - authorities under the Central Excise Act 1944 of witholding payment of sanctioned rebate claims aggregating to Rs. 1,36,998/- and witholding payment of interest on delayed payment of refund. The petitioner has also prayed for writ of mandamus to direct the respondent - authorities to pay the aforesaid amount of Rs. 1,36,998/- as the sanctioned rebate claims along with statutory interest at the prescribed rate on delayed payments of rebate till the date of payment. 3. The facts leading to filing of this petition are as under :- 3.1 The petitioner is a limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the business of manufacturing inorganic, organic chemicals and pharmaceutical products. The petitioner cleared finished excisa...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »