Gujarat Court January 2003 Judgments
Textile Labour Association Vs. Official Liquidator of Star of Gujarat ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-24-2003
Reported in: [2004]118CompCas133(Guj); [2003]43SCL168(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. This Company application is filed by Textile Labour Association and in the Judge's Summons taken out by the said Association, a prayer is made seeking direction to pay an amount of Rs. 5,15,76,953.00 to 607 workmen of the Star of Gujarat Mills Co. Ltd. (In Liquidation). By way of an interim relief, it is prayed for that an amount at the rate of 10 per cent of the amount claimed may be paid to all those workmen.2. In support of the Judge's Summons, an Affidavit is filed by one Mr. Manilal G. Parmar, the Secretary of the applicant Association wherein it is, inter alia, stated that by a separate order passed by this Court, the plant and machinery have been disposed of by the Sale Committee and an amount of Rs. 1,50,00,000 has been realised. It was further stated that the claim of 607 workmen of the Star of Gujarat Mills Co. Ltd. (In Liq.) has already been lodged with the Official Liquidator. It was further stated that since the amount of Rs. 1,50,00,000 was lying with the O...
Tag this Judgment!Yakeen Ahmed Abdul Majidkhan Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-23-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2868; (2003)1GLR772
H.K. Rathod, J. 1. Few observations made by the Apex Court in case of Chairman, Railway Board v. Chandrima Das, reported in AIR 2000 SC 988, as regards the rights enshrined under Part III of the Constitution of India are relevant and material in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case. They are therefore, reproduced as under :'36. The rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution are not absolute in terms. They are subject to reasonable restriction, and therefore, in case of non-citizen also, those Rights will be available subject to such restrictions as may be imposed in the interest of the security of the State or other important considerations. Interest of the Nation and security of the State is supreme. Since 1948, when the Universal Declaration was adopted till this day, there have been many changes political, social and economic while terrorism has disturbed the global scenario. Primacy of the interest of Nation and the security of State will have to be re...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Lallubhai Jogibhai Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-23-2003
Reported in: (2003)182CTR(Guj)371; [2003]261ITR216(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'C', has referred the following question for the opinion of this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in confirming the penalty only in respect of an amount of Rs. 31,000 and thereby cancelling the balance penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?'2. During the course of operation under Section 132 of the Act on November 30, 1974, a Mercedez car was found parked in the premises of the assessee. The registration book, a servicing bill and a blank transfer form signed by the owner of the vehicle were also recovered from the premises. As the assessee did not disclose the source of income by which he had acquired the said vehicle, an amount of Rs. 65,000, representing the investment, was added to the total income of the assessee and a notice under Section 274 read with Section 271 was issued to show cause as to why penalty un...
Tag this Judgment!N.C. Banawala Vs. District Judge and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-23-2003
Reported in: (2003)3GLR1866
K.R. Vyas, J.1. The petitioner, in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenges the action on the part of the respondents by which he has been denied the benefits of retrospective seniority and promotion to the post of Junior Clerk and Head, Clerk in the relevant cadre. He challenges the aforesaid action on the ground that the same is unjust, unfair, unreasonable, discriminatory and arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitutionof India and also violative of Amended Rules of Subordinate Judicial Services Recruitment Rules, dated 16-7-1976. As can be seen from the petition, the petitioner challenges the order passed by the District Judge, Banaskantha, at Palanpur, dated 16-9-1981 with order dated 8-1-1982, rejecting the application/ representation dated 6-6-1981 of the petitioner, for seniority retrospectively from 1969. The petitioner also challenges the order dated 22nd March 1982 passed in Appeal by the High Court (Administrative Side) p...
Tag this Judgment!KlIn Industrial Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-22-2003
Reported in: (2003)182CTR(Guj)362; [2003]261ITR338(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J. 1. These two references raise common questions and have been argued together by learned counsel for both the sides.2. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B', has referred the following two questions, which are the subject matter of Income-tax Reference No. 51 of 1989, under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in withdrawing rehabilitation allowance of Rs. 26,910 granted by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) under Section 33B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of the properties which were extensively damaged ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in remanding the matter to the Income-tax Officer to work out relief under Section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 3. The Tribunal has also referred the following two questions, which are the subjec...
Tag this Judgment!Panmeshwary Devi and ors. Vs. O.N.G.C. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-22-2003
Reported in: (2003)2GLR1490
Jayant Patel, J.1. Heard Mr. G.T. Dayani, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. A. R. Mehta, learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 are served with the notice of rule. However, neither the respondents themselves, nor any advocate on their behalf has appeared when the matter is taken up for final hearing.2. The present petition is preferred by the petitioners for challenging the order dated 9-7-2001 passed by the General Manager, O.N.G.C., Ahmedabad for disbursement of terminal benefits of the deceased, Dharampal Singh and by way of apportionment of 50% to the wife and the children and 25% to the father and 25% to the mother.3. Mr. Dayani for the petitioners, at the outset, has submitted that though initially the challenge in the petition was against the disbursement of 25% amount to the mother also, however, the petitioners have no objection if 25% share of terminal benefits is paid to the mother of the deceased employee and he submitted that now ...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Kanagraj Nadar Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-22-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2668; (2003)4GLR191
M.S. Shah, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 29.12.1998 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Rajkot convicting the appellant-accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentencing the accused to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 500/= in default simple imprisonment for one month for the said offence. By the same judgment the accused was acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 135(1) read with Section 37 of the Bombay Police Act.2. The accused was doing the business of preparing and selling South Indian dishes like idli, dosas on the Kalavad Road at Rajkot. The charge against the accused was that deceased Bhagirathsinh Juvansinh Jadeja used to often visit the larry of the accused and used to eat food articles free of cost and was harassing the accused. On 2.3.1997 at about 9.00 P.M., the deceased had gone to the larry of the accused and beaten the accused by giving slaps and fist and kick blows. Thereafter, the ac...
Tag this Judgment!Sarpanch - Dhari Gram Panchayat Vs. Jayeshkumar Mulshanker Bhatt
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-22-2003
Reported in: (2003)4GLR26
Kundan Singh, J. 1. Rule. Learned advocate Ms. Disha Nanavati waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent. With the consent of the learned advocates for both parties, this petition is taken up for final hearing today.2. This petition has been filed for quashing and setting aside the judgment and order dated 19th September, 2002 passed the learned Assistant Judge, Amreli in Civil Misc. Appeal no. 60 of 2001 below application exh. 10 filed by the respondents and rejecting the appeal of the petitioners on the ground of delay.3. In this case, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners filed Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 60 of 2001 before the District Court, Amreli. It was found that there was a delay of three days and that the petitioners had not filed an application alongwith the memo of the appeal to condone that delay. The petitioners filed appeal on 27th August, 2001. On 5.4.2002, the application exh. 19 was filed for condoning the delay in...
Tag this Judgment!Jamnagar District Co-op. Bank Ltd. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-18-2003
Reported in: (2003)2GLR1258
R.M. Doshit, J. 1. The petitioner before this Court is a Co-operative Bank (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bank') duly registered under the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925. The Bank is governed by the bye-laws framed by it. In its Annual General Meeting convened on 11th September, 1998, the General Body resolved to accept the amendment, inter alia, of Bye-laws 30, 54 and 63B proposed by the Board of Directors. The Bye-law 30 deals with the election of the Chairman of the Board of Directors. The said amendment was forwarded to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, the respondent No. 2 herein, for due registration as envisaged in Section 13 of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') read with Rule 6 of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). The respondent No. 2, under communication dated 22nd September, 1999, communicated the registration of the said amended Bye-laws along with the a...
Tag this Judgment!Jyotsnaben Ratilal Vs. Pravinchandra Tulsidas
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-18-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Guj222; (2003)2GLR1395b
ORDERK.M. Mehta, J.1. Jyotsnaben Ratilal appellant-original respondent has filed this Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the judgment and decree dated 16-4-2001 passed by the learned Joint District Judge, Jamnagar in Regular Civil Appeal No. 57 of 2000 whereby the learned Appellate Judge has allowed the appeal of the original appellant and was pleased to quash and set aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge (SD), Jamnagar dated 9-8-2000, The learned Appellate Judge by his Judgment further directed that the marriage between the present appellant i.e. Jyotsnaben and the present respondent i.e. Pravinchandra Tulsidas which took place on 27-6-1988 is declared as null and void under Section 12(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter will be referred to as the 'Act').2. The facts leading to this appeal are as under :2.1. The marriage betweenPravinchandra Tulsidas original petitionerrespondent herein was solemnized w...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »