Gujarat Court August 2002 Judgments
Pravinbhai Jagjivandas Mehta Vs. Officine Lovato S.P.A.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-06-2002
Reported in: 2002(25)PTC398(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. In these appeals, the appellant has challenged the common order dated 1st February, 2002, whereby the learned Single Judge rejected the applications for interim injunction and vacated the ex parte ad-interim injunction which was granted with a direction on the first respondent to furnish, during the pendency of the suit, the statements of accounts of sales of the five products in question which were relatable to the five designs registered in favour of the appellant. It was simultaneously directed that in case, the registration of the designs of favour of the appellant was cancelled under Section 19 of the Designs Act, 2000, or under the Copyright Act, the interim directions shall cease to operate even before the disposal of the suits.2. The appellant - original plaintiff claimed to have invented and designed five specific designs in certain parts which were used for converting Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) and Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG) as fuel for running aut...
Tag this Judgment!Gatubha Mohansinh Jadeja and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-05-2002
Reported in: (2003)1GLR858
Sharad D. Dave, J.1. The present appellants/original accused in the Sessions Case No. 174 of 1991 have filed this appeal against the judgment and order passed in the said case against the appellants by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Rajkot on 7-1-1993 wherein the appellant No. 1 was convicted to simple imprisonment for one month and fine of Rs. 100/- in default simple imprisonment for 7 days for the offence under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and all the appellants were convicted for simple imprisonment for one month and fine of Rs. 100/- in default simple imprisonment for seven days for the offence under Sections 504, 506(2), 114 of I.P.C. and further convicted the appellants for simple imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 200/- in default simple imprisonment for twelve days for the offence under Section 3(2)(10) of S.C. and S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. It appears that all the accused/appellants have paid the fine, a...
Tag this Judgment!Banian and Berry Bearing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-05-2002
Reported in: 2002(105)LC288(Gujarat)
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 3.7.2002 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise, Division-Rural-I, Ahmedabad-II which is produced at Annexure 'E' to the petition.3. The facts leading to filing of this petition, briefly stated, are as under:The petitioner-Company is discharging central excise duty on fortnightly basis as per the proviso to Rule 49 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. On various occasions, the petitioners did not have sufficient balance in their outstanding duty on the due dates for payment of duty. The sum total of outstanding duty on the due dates was Rs. 16,15,569/-. This outstanding amount was paid later on different occasions along with due interest from the CENVAT account. The petitioners were served with the show cause notice dated 29.11.2001 calling upon the petitioners...
Tag this Judgment!Shailesh R. Shah Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-02-2002
Reported in: (2002)3GLR447
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. This group of petitions raises common questions and the petitions have been argued together by the learned Counsels appearing for both the sides.2. The petitions centre around the question of protecting, preserving and improving the water-bodies in the State and safeguarding them against encroachments.3. In Special Civil Application No. 10621 of 2000, the petitioner has sought a direction on the respondents to place water policy of the Government of Gujarat before this Court and also the record to show big and small lakes in and around Ahmedabad as they existed in the year 1960 and their present status. A direction is also sought for removing all encroachments on the land bearing Survey No. 353 of lake Chandola and for executing the work for distillation, reviving feeder streams and taking effective steps for reviving and recharging it. It is stated in the petition that lake Chandola which is on the outskirts of Ahmedabad admeasured about 297 acres and 28 gunthas...
Tag this Judgment!S.G. Munia Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-02-2002
Reported in: (2002)3GLR659
A.M. Kapadia, J.1. Rule. Mr. K.C. Shah, learned A.P.P., appears and waives the service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent No. 1 whereas Mr. Yogesh Lakhani, learned Advocate appears and waives the service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent No. 2.2. By means of filing this petition under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('the Code' for short), petitioners who are Police Officials at the relevant time serving in District Kachchh at Bhuj, have prayed to quash and set aside the Criminal Complaint bearing Inquiry Case No. 72 of 1999 arising out of M. Case No. 21 of 1999 of Bhuj Town Police Station and also prayed to quash and set aside the judgment and order dated October 11, 2001 passed in Criminal Revision Petition No. 2 of 2001 by the learned Sessions Judge, Kachchh at Bhuj and also the order dated December 30, 2000 passed in M. Case No. 21 of 1999 (Criminal Inquiry No. 72 of 1999) by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kachchh at Bhuj rejecting 'C' summary...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Upnishad Investment P. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-02-2002
Reported in: [2003]260ITR532(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.1. In these references, where there are more than one asses-see in a reference, the Registry shall give separate reference numbers for different assessees that is to say that there shall be a separate reference number for each assessee.2. In this group of 80 references and 255 tax appeals, at the instance of the Revenue, the following questions have been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad, for the opinion of this court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') :'1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law that the interest on debentures issued by companies other than local authority, company or corporation established by a Central, State or Provincial Act is not liable to be computed as income under the head 'Interest on securities' ? 2. Whether interest on debentures in all circumstances is liable to be considered income only when received by the assessee...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Upnishad Investment (P) Ltd. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-02-2002
Reported in: (2002)177CTR(Guj)176
M.S. Shah, J.In these references, where there are more than one assessee in a reference, the Registry shall give separate reference numbers for different assessees that is to say that there shall be a separate reference number for each assessee.2. In this group of 80 references and 255 tax appeals, at the instance of the revenue, the following questions have been referred by the Tribunal, Ahmedabad for the opinion of this court under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act) :1. 'Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law that the interest on debentures issued by companies other than local authority, company or corporation established by a Central State or Provincial Act is not liable to be computed as income under the head 'interest on securities' ?2. Whether interest on debentures in all circumstances is liable to be considered income only when received by the assessee and not when it becomes due ?'3. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Ramanbhai Becharbhai Rami Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-01-2002
Reported in: 2003(86)ECC325; (2002)3GLR252
H.H. Mehta, J.1. As these two appeals are arising from one common judgment dated 11-9-1997 rendered by Additional Sessions Judge, Nadiad in Special N.D.P.S. Case No. 9 of 1996, same are disposed of by this Common Judgment. Criminal Appeal No. 987 of 1997 is filed by original accused No. 2-Ramanbhai Becharbhai Rami, while Criminal Appeal No. 1029 of 1997 is filed by original accused No. 1-Prabhat Mahiji Gohil.2. Original accused No. 1 of Special N.D.P.S. case has by filing Criminal Appeal No. 1029 of 1997 challenged the correctness and legality of judgment of conviction and sentence dated 11th September, 1997 rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nadiad, whereby, he has been convicted under Section 235(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.' for short) for the offences punishable under Sections 17, 18 and 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the N.D.P.S. Act' for short) and is sentenced to...
Tag this Judgment!Gordhanbhai N. Vaghela Vs. Maruti Co-op. Housing Society and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-01-2002
Reported in: (2003)1GLR117
Jayant Patel, J.1. Since, in both these petitions the facts are common and rather inter-connected, they are being dealt with together.2. The common facts are that one Smt. Pallaviben and one Shri Shirishbhai were the members of Maruti Co-operative Housing Society Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'respondent-Society), It is the case of the petitioner that the said Pallaviben and Shirishbhai (hereinafter referred to as 'original members') had executed a Power of Attorney in favour of one Smt. Maltiben, who was looking after the affairs of Pallaviben, since Pallaviben, as per the contention of the petitioners, is residing in the U.S.A. The original members were allotted Plot No. 6 with tenement by the society in capacity as the members of the society. The said Maltiben, who in her capacity of Power of Attorney holder of the original members had initially entered into an agreement somewhere in the month of January, 1988 with one Dayaljibhai N. Vaghela. However, the other members of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Modern Terry Towels Ltd. Vs. Gujarat Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-01-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Guj63; (2003)4GLR354
ORDERD.A. Mehta, J.1. Rule. Mr. A.D. Oza, learned Advocate appears and waives service on behalf of respondent-GEB. As the pleadings are complete, by consent of both the sides the matter has been heard and is being disposed of finally, 2. The petitioner, a Company, duly registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, is engaged in the business of manufacturing 100% cotton towels, within the territorial jurisdiction of Sanand Sub-Division of the Gujarat Electricity Board (for short 'the Board'). The Board supplieselectricity to the petitioner exclusively by way of a separate feeder having separate meters at both the ends viz. Sub-station from which the power is supplied and the point at which the power is received i.e. at the petitioner's installation. The petitioner is a high tension consumer of the Board having HT. Consumer No. 17263. The petitioner's contracted demand is 2400 KVA. The petitioner is provided with special electric meter known as Static meter or Trivecto mete...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›