Gujarat Court September 2002 Judgments
Patel Prakash Prahladbhai Vs. Government Medical College
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-12-2002
Reported in: (2003)4GLR184
Jayant Patel, J.1. This petition is preferred challenging the legality and validity of the rule of permitting jumping of post graduate students in medicine from one branch to another branch of post graduate study more particularly after getting admission and prosecuting studies for some time.2. Short facts of the case are that the petitioners are students who have completed MBBS and they are aspirant to get admission in PG course to various branches in medicines and others of South Gujarat University. The contention of the petitioners is that so far as other Universities and medical colleges affiliated to other Universities of Gujarat State are concerned, there is no such provision permitting jumping from one branch to another branch in the midst of studies and it is only in South Gujarat University, such a practice is prevailing on account of Rule 8 of P.G.Rule (Medical Admission). The Rule 8 which is under challenge in this petition is reproduced as under:' A student intending to tak...
Tag this Judgment!Bhailalbhai Garbabhai Vasava and anr. Vs. Munikhan Ismailkhan Sayed an ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-11-2002
Reported in: II(2003)ACC352; 2003ACJ1117; (2003)1GLR605
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.1. The present First Appeal is filed being aggrieved of the judgment and award dated 11th February, 1985 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Panchmahals at Godhra in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 479 of 1982, whereby the petitioners, appellants herein, are held entitled to recover from opponent Nos. 1 and 3 (driver and owner respectively of the vehicle) a sum of Rs. 48,240-00 (Rupees Forty Eight Thousand Two Hundred Forty Only) by way of compensation with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the application till realisation. The Tribunal was pleased to exonerate the Insurance Company accepting the plea of the Insurance Company, opponent No. 4 before the Tribunal, that the driver of the vehicle had no valid licence to drive the vehicle in question, and thus, there was breach of the terms and conditions of the policy.2. Mr. M.T.M. Hakim, learned Advocate appearing for the appellants, invited the attention of the Court to the discu...
Tag this Judgment!United Commercial Bank Vs. Ambica Bus Corporation and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-11-2002
Reported in: III(2003)BC111; (2003)2GLR1143
Ravi R. Tripathi, J. 1. The present First Appeal is filed being aggrieved of the judgment and order dated 10th March, 1981 passed by the learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Nadiad in Special Civil Suit No. 59 of 1977, abating the suit filed by the plaintiff-appellant herein. 2. The appellant, plaintiff-Bank filed Special Civil Suit No. 59 of 1977 for recovery of unpaid amount of loan, which was advanced by the appellant-Bank to the respondent-defendant for purchase of a taxi. The person to whom the loan was advanced died, and therefore, his heirs, along with respondent No. 1 as respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and the guarantor i.e. respondent No. 6 (defendant No. 6) were sued. 3. On a close scrutiny of the judgment impugned in the present First Appeal, it is found that the learned Judge has focussed his attention only to the aspect that in view of the provisions of the Gujarat Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) the suit of the Bank has abated. Th...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat Vs. Polabhai Ajabhai (Decd.) Through His Heirs Gangab ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-09-2002
Reported in: (2003)1GLR887
P.B. Majmudar, J.1. The State of Gujarat has filed this Special Civil Application, challenging the order passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in Appeal No. TEN/AR-15 of 1994 dated 3rd January, 1995. By the impugned order, the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the present respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and order passed by the Collector, Rajkot in Land Revision No. 5 of 1991 is quashed and set aside by the Tribunal and the order passed by the Deputy Collector, Rajkot in L.R.C. 37(2) Case No. 21-82-83 dated 15-7-1991 is restored. This petition, which is against the order of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal, is essentially a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The proceedings in question arise under Section 37 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code. The grandfather of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 herein, one Aja Ramji, applied for occupancy certificate as he was cultivating certain land as a tenant under the Saurashtra Land Reforms Act. Ultimately, in the year 1954...
Tag this Judgment!L.H. Sharma Vs. Council of Homoeopathic System of Medicine
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-09-2002
Reported in: (2003)4GLR14
Akshay H. Mehta, J.1. In this petition, grievance has been made that without following the due procedure, the petitioner has been dismissed from the service by the respondents. Hence, he has prayed that the respondents be directed to reinstate the petitioner on his original post with full backwages.2. Certain relevant facts giving rise to this petition can be stated as under :-2.1. The petitioner at the relevant time was in the employment of the respondents. Initially he was working as Assistant Registrar and subsequently, he was put in charge of the Registrar of respondent no.1. While he was in charge of the post of Registrar, on account of some acts of misconduct alleged to have been committed by the petitioner during the service, he was ordered to be placed under suspension. The petitioner challenged the said order of suspension by filing Special Civil Application no.2962/1989. The said petition was admitted by this Court. However, by way of interim relief it was directed that the o...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagwanbhai Raghunathbhai Chaudhary Vs. District Primary Education Off ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: (2002)3GLR475
Y.B. Bhatt, J.1. This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, though styled as a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, for enforcement of fundamental rights under Article 14 of the Constitution.1.1 The petitioner herein challenges the order of termination of service of the petitioner passed by the District Primary Education Officer, ultimately confirmed in appeal by the Director of Primary Education. Obviously, therefore, this is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution since the petitioner challenges the orders passed by the statutory authorities in the performance of their quasi-judicial functions.1.2 Before proceeding further on the merits of the matter, it is desirable to keep in mind the observations of the Supreme Court in the case of (i) Mohmmad Yunus v. Mohammad Mustaqim, AIR 1984 SC 38, (ii) Khalil Ahmed Bashir v. Tufelhussein S. Sarangpurwala, AIR 1988 SC 184 and (iii) Ashok Kumar v. Sita Ram, 2001 (4) SCC 478 on the question of the sco...
Tag this Judgment!Mahendrasinh Ranmalsinh and anr. Vs. J.R. Patel and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: (2003)1GLR89
Akshay H. Mehta, J.1. This petition is essentially under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the judgment and order passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal ('the Tribunal' for short) dated 20th September, 1994 in Revision Application No. TEN-B.A. 9/1994. Vide the said judgment the Tribunal has allowed the Revision Application of the present respondent and has set aside the judgment of the Deputy Collector, (Appeals), District Kheda at Kheda.1.1. According to the petitioners, they were inducted on the land bearing Survey No. 254 of village Vadod in Taluka Anand, District Kheda admeasuring 0.24 gunthas in the year 1972 and since then they have been cultivating the said land. It is their say that their names were entered into the revenue records maintained by the Revenue authorities in the year 1979-80. It is further stated by the petitioners that proceedings under Section 32O of the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 ('the Act' for short) were initiated in view...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. S.G. Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: (2003)179CTR(Guj)605; [2003]261ITR432(Guj)
A.R. Dave, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question of law, arising out of the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A', has been referred to this court for its opinion under the provisions of Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') :'Whether, in law and on facts, the Appellate Tribunal has rightly reached a conclusion that the penal provisions could not be invoked in the case of the assessee ?'2. We have heard learned standing counsel for the Income-tax Department, Mr. Tanvish U. Bhatt, and the learned advocate, Mr. Bhargav Karia, for the respondent.3. The facts giving rise to the present reference in a nutshell are as under.4. For the assessment year 1975-76, a notice of demand under Section 210 read with Section 156 of the Act dated June 7, 1974, was issued to the respondent-assessee whereby an amount of Rs. 1,39,52,730 was required to be paid by the respondent-assessee in three equal instalme...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. S.G. Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: [2002]125TAXMAN621(Guj)
A.R. Dave, J.At the instance of the revenue, the following question of law, arising out of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A', has been referred to this court for its opinion under the provisions of section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') :'Whether, in law and on facts, the appellate Tribunal has rightly reached a conclusion that penal provisions could not be invoked in the case of assessee ?'2. We have heard learned standing counsel for the Income Tax Department Mr. Tanvish U. Bhatt and learned Advocate Mr. Bhargav Karia for the respondent.3. The facts giving rise to the present reference in a nutshell are as under.4. For the assessment year 1975-76, a notice of demand under section 210 read with section 156 of the Act dated 7-6-1974 (sic) was issued to the respondent-assessee whereby an amount of Rs. 1,39,52,730 was required to be paid by the respondent assessee in three equal instalments during the fin...
Tag this Judgment!Harshadbhai Zinabhai Desai Vs. Bhavnaben Harshadbhai Desai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-04-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Guj74; (2003)1GLR550
ORDERR.M. Doshit, J.1. Rule returnable today, learned Advocate Mr. R. S. Sanjanwala appears for and waives service on behalf of the respondent.2. The present Revision Application arises from the order elated 16th May, 1992 made by the learned-Assistant Judge, Valsad, below application Exh. 14 in Guardianship Application No. 13/1991. The petitioner before this Court is the father of the minor child, and the opponent in the said Application No. 13/1991.3. The petitioner herein is residing at Dadra in the Union Territory of Dadra and Nagar Haveli. The respondent herein, the applicant in the Application No. 13/1991 (hereinafter referred to as the applicant), is the wife of the petitioner. The dispute is as regards the guardianship of the minor child 'Roshni'.4. The petitioner a resident of Dadra, and the applicant a resident of Umargaon, District Valsad, were married in the year 1980. The minor child 'Roshni' was born in the month of December, 1989 at Umargaon. After her birth, the applica...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »