Gujarat Court May 2003 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Halvad Nagarpalika and ors. Vs. Jani Dipakbhai Chandravadanbhai and or ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-08-2003
Reported in: (2003)4GLR461
K.A. Puj, J. 1. This group of five Letters Patent Appeals and two Special Civil Applications is in respect of same subject matter and hence they are being disposed of by this common Judgment. All these Letters Patent Appeals are arising out of the common judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge on 25-1-2001. The appellants No. 1 and 2, in all these Letters Patent Appeals, are Halvad Nagarpalika and its Chief Officer, who were the original-respondents in the Special Civil Applications. Letters Patent Appeals No. 99 to 101 of 2003 had come up for hearing on 1-4-2003, and this Court has admitted the said appeals and stayed the order of the learned Single Judge. The order regarding interim relief in the nature of staying the order of learned Single Judge was passed in Civil Applications No. 7569, 7647 and 7567 of 2002. Letters Patent Appeal No. 1202 and 1203 of 2002 and Civil Applications No. 27 of 2003 as well as 7568 of 2002 had come up for hearing before the Division Bench,...
Bhupatji Shakaraji Thakore Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-08-2003
Reported in: (2004)1GLR168
D.P. Buch, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant-convict under Sub-section (2) of Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'the Code'), read with Section 36B of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, 'the N.D.P.S. Act') against the judgment and conviction order dated 28-4-1997 recorded by the learned Addl. City Sessions Judge, Court No. 15, Ahmedabad City in Sessions Case No. 96 of 1996 under which the learned Judge convicted the present appellant for offence punishable under Sees. 21 and 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act, and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for 10 years. A fine of Rupees One lakh was also imposed by the learned trial Judge. In default of payment of fine, the appellant was required to undergo further imprisonment for one year.2. The case of the prosecution before the trial Court was that on 10-12-1995, Police Inspector, K.C. Bava working in Crime Branch at Ahmedabad received an information that the present appellant wearing ...
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Smt. Geetaben Vipinbhai Shah
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-07-2003
Reported in: (2004)190CTR(Guj)612; [2004]270ITR282(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad Bench 'A' has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this Court under Section 64 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953. 'Whether, in law and on facts, the Appellate Tribunal is right in holding that the interest of the wives of the co-parceners has to be excluded in determining the share of the lineal descendants which is to be included in the principal value of the estate left by the deceased for rate purposes u/s. 34(1)(c) of the E. D. Act, 1953?' 2. The Estate Duty account in respect of the estate of Dahyabhai Maneklal who passed away on 9.11.1962, was filed on 21.11.1963. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, Ahmedabad, in the assessment order made under Section 58(3) of the said Act worked out the value of the estate of the deceased in the H.U.F. and came to the conclusion that 1/5th share of the deceased in the HUF was of the value of Rs. 3,23,541/-. The interest of three lineal descendants of the de...
United Phosphorus Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-06-2003
Reported in: 2005(184)ELT240(Guj); (2003)2GLR1665
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. Rule. Mr. D. N. Patel waives service of rule. At the request of both the sides, we take up the matter for final disposal.2. The petitioners have challenged the communication dated 10th January, 2003, issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Division I, Ankleshwar, by which the refund claim application which was made by the petitioner was returned with an observation that the relevant date for the purpose of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, would be from the date of fresh filing of the refund claim. The petitioners, by letters dated 20th December, 2002, submitted two refund applications to the respondent No. 3, claiming the refund of the excess duty of Rs. 1,36,040/- in respect of Unit-I and Rs. 20,21,872-96 ps. in respect of Unit-III, paid by the petitioner for the goods cleared during the period from January, 2002 to March, 2002. Copies of these two refund applications are at Annexures : A/1 and A/2 to the petition. Accordi...
Abhuji Karshaji Thakore Vs. Thakore Jitaben Manchaji and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-05-2003
Reported in: (2003)2GLR1541
J.M. Panchal, J. 1. Pursuant to order dated May 5, 2003, passed in Civil Application No. 2125 of 2003, which was filed in Civil Application No. 1221 of 2003 filed in Letters Patent Appeal No. 179 of 2003 arising out of interim order dated February 13, 2003 passed in Special Civil Application No. 516 of 2003, Letters Patent Appeal No. 179 of 2003 is taken up for final disposal today. 2. Instant appeal, which is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, is directed against interim order dated February 13, 2003 passed by the learned single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 516 of 2003 by which operation of order dated October 5, 2002 passed by the District Development Officer, Patan, suspending the respondent No, 1 from the office of Sarpanch of Ablauva Gram Panchayat, Taluka & District Patan because of institution of criminal proceedings in respect of offences involving moral turpitude, has been stayed during the pendency and final disposal of Special Civil Application No. 516 of...
Self-employed Workers Organization Vs. Municipal Corporation City of B ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Guj317; (2003)3GLR2276
ORDERR.M. Doshit, J.1. Draft amendment is allowed. The amendment shall be carried out forthwith.2. The petitioner before this Court claims to be the Organization of self-employed workers (hereinafter referred to as 'the organization'). At the time of the hearing of the petition on 1st May, 2003, Mr. Pahwa had submitted the above referred amendment. Along with the amendment is the list of persons who, according to the petitioner, are the members of the Organization. It is the claim that the members of the Organization are shall business people who run their business from small stalls placed on the public roads of the city of Bhavnagar. A long time dispute as to the right of the said members to carry on business on the public roads is pending before this Court. Earlier, the Organization had filed Special Civil Application No. 4838/1982 for the benefit of the members and some individuals also preferred Special Civil Application No. 5485/1982. The said petitions were amicably settled. Unde...
Commissioner of Gift Tax Vs. Nandkishore Sakarlal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2003
Reported in: (2003)184CTR(Guj)27; [2003]264ITR453(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J.1.The Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A', has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this Court under Section 26 Of the GT Act, 1958 :'Whether in law on facts, the assessee is liable to pay tax under the GT Act, 1958, on account of the variations made on 31st Dec., 1970, in'the settlement deed of 1961 ?'2. The assessee-HUF filed gift-tax return on 30th Nov., 1971, showing value of taxable gift of Rs. Nil for the year relevant to the asst. yr. 1971-72. On the fresh assessment which was done pursuant to the appellate orders, the GTO held by his order dt. 30th March, 1982, that, on exercising the power of revocation under Clause (15) of the trust deed dt. 11th April, 1961, that earlier deed ceased to exist in law and a new trust came into existence by virtue of the deed dt. 31st Dec., 1970, and therefore, the assessee was liable to pay gift-tax in respect of the property transferred for which the trust was created under each of the trust deeds. The CGT(A)...
Vinodbhai Maganbhai Vaghri Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ443; (2003)4GLR715
D.P. Buch, J. 1. This is an appeal by the appellant-convict above-named under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in order to challenge the judgment and conviction order dated 23.10.2000 recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Kheda at Nadiad in Sessions Case No.52 of 2000 under which the learned trial Judge convicted the present appellant for an offence punishable under Section 376 IPC and sentenced him to suffer RI for 10 years. The learned trial Judge further directed the appellant to pay fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine, he was required to undergo further RI for 5 months. The learned trial Judge also directed that in case of payment of fine by the present appellant, the said amount be paid to victim Laxmiben by way of compensation.2. The facts of the case of the prosecution against the appellant before the trial Court may be briefly stated as follows:-2.1 On 16.12.1999, informant-Savitaben was present at her residence. At about evening hours, it ...
Bhaniben W/O Nathabhai Gulabbhai Vs. Narayan Pottery Works
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Guj1
J.N. Bhatt, Acting C. J. 1. In this group of revision applications, a common question is involved, arising out of common provisions. Therefore, these matters are taken up together, upon the request of learned counsels appearing for the parties, and the matters are being disposed of by this common judgment, in a reference made by the learned Single Judge by order dated 10-10-2001 in Civil Revision Applications Nos.601 to 609 of 2001. The learned Single Judge has referred these matters to this Division Bench, in view of the referral order under Rule 5(2) of the Gujarat High Court Rules, 1993. It is jointly and rightly stated before us that the factual profile of each revision, is not required to be articulated, since common question of law is arising out of the provisions of [The] Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, 1882 (Act 15 of 1882) (for short `the Act'). The controversy, even on facts, is common, but some of the facts may be diverse in revisions. 2. The learned Single Judge has rais...
State of Gujarat Vs. Chauhan Ramjibhai Karsanbhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2003
Reported in: [2004(102)FLR347]; (2004)1GLR885
H.K. Rathod, J. 1. Heard learned AGP Mr. H.D. Dave appearing on behalf of the petitioner - State of Gujarat and learned advocate Ms. Sejal Mandavia for respondent workman.With the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, this matter is taken up for final hearing today.2. The petitioner has challenged the award passed by the Labour Court, Bhavnagar in Reference No.469 / 1990 dated 7th February, 2001 wherein termination order has been set aside and granted reinstatement on the post of Draftsman [Civil] or an other equivalent post with continuity of service and full wages with all consequential benefits.3. It may be noted that this Court while dealing with this writ petition, has issued Rule and granted interim relief in terms of Para-13[C] vide order dated 7th November, 2001. Learned AGP Mr. H.D. Dave for the petitioner has submitted that the respondent workman was not a workman appointed by the petitioner but he was appointed as Apprentice under the Apprentices Act, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »