Gujarat Court June 2003 Judgments
Shanabhai Madhurbhai Koli Patel Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-27-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ268
1. This Appeal is preferred by accused of Session Case No. 69 of 1997 against the judgment and order of conviction passed by learned Sessions Judge, Panchmahals at Godhra, on 27.09.1999, convicting the present appellant for the charges levelled against him under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him for 5 years rigorous imprisonment and imposed fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment of six months. The period of undertrial custody was ordered to be given set off to the accused. The accused - present appellant deposited the amount of fine and filed this Criminal Appeal on 16.10.1999. Bail was refused by this Court but the Appeal was expedited.2. Brief facts of the case reveals that PW-1 Amriben Maganbhai, resident of village Uchawan, Tal. Devgadh, Dist. Panchmahal, filed First Information Report on 12.12.1996 before Devgadh Baria Police Station, and at the relevant time, PW-5 Dhanjibhai Lunjabhai was the Police Station Officer, who recorded compla...
Tag this Judgment!Prashant Vinodbhai Acharya Vs. Regional Passport Officer
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-26-2003
Reported in: (2004)1GLR212
Jayant Patel, J. 1. Rule. Mr.N.J.Shah for Mr.D.N.Patel for respondent waives service of rule. With the consent of parties matter is taken up for final hearing today.2. The contention raised by the petitioner is that the passport was already issued and the same has expired on 23-3-2003. However, the birth-date initially in the passport was recorded as 2-8-1962 whereas the correct birth-date is 2-9-1962. The petitioner submits that he wants to submit application for new passport with correct birth-date, however, the authorities have declined to consider the same in the absence of any order passed by this court.3. On behalf of Passport authorities it has been submitted that earlier on the basis of School Leaving Certificate passport has been issued. If this court directs the passport authorities, they will consider the matter.4. Mr.Bhakta for the petitioner submits that in similar matters this court has passed orders giving directions to the passport authorities to reconsider the matter a...
Tag this Judgment!Adambhai Sulemanbhai Desai Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-26-2003
Reported in: (2004)1GLR906
D.A. Mehta, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 26/6/1992 passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in Revision Application No.TEN.BA. 127/88 & TEN BA.137/88 as well as order dated 17/4/1995 in Review Application No.TEN CA.42/92 and TEN CA.43/92 passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal')2. The petitioner is Chairman of one Desai Cooperative Housing Society Limited and has preferred the petition for and on behalf of the petitioner society registered under the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act. The dispute relates to land bearing survey no.205 admeasuring 4 Acres 31 Gunthas situated in the sim of Dhandhuka town. The said lands were originally of the ownership of a public trust named 'SARVARSHA PIR'. One Musabhai Yakubbhai (since deceased), was the tenant and was cultivating the aforesaid land owned by the trust. Upon death of said Musabhai Yakubbhai the names of his heirs viz. respondent nos. 2 to 5 came ...
Tag this Judgment!Saurashtra University and anr. Vs. Saurashtra University Karmachari Pa ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-26-2003
Reported in: [2004(101)FLR536]; (2004)1GLR160
Ravi R. Tripathi, J. 1. The present petition is filed by Saurashtra University and its Registrar challenging the order dated 4th December, 2001 passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Saurashtra-Kutch at Rajkot making a Reference of the dispute mentioned in the Schedule attached thereto, and the order dated 7th March, 2002 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Rajkot in Reference (IT) No.10 of 2002 directing the petitioner-University to maintain status quo qua the five workmen till the next date of hearing, issuing a show cause notice to show cause as to why the reliefs prayed for in the application be not granted and fixing the next date of hearing on 20th March, 2002. 2. The Civil Application No.1649 of 2003 is filed for a relief to issue an interim mandatory order to the opponents not to give effect to the show cause notice dated 19th February, 2003 in any manner, by terminating the services of the said five workmen, pending the hearing and final disposal of the Special Civil Applica...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Utkarsh Builders
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-25-2003
Reported in: (2003)184CTR(Guj)293; [2003]264ITR697(Guj)
A.R. Dave, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question of law been referred to this Court for its opinion by the Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B' under the provisions of Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') :'Whether, in law and on facts, the assessee is entitled to depreciation at the rate of 30 per cent on two items, namely, (1) Hot Mixing Plant and (2) Paver Finishing Machine used by the assessee in its activity of road building ?'2. We have heard senior standing counsel Shri M.R. Bhatt for the applicant Revenue. Nobody has appeared for the respondent-assessee, though the respondent-assessee has been duly served with the notice of this Court.3. The facts giving rise to this reference, in a nutshell, are as under :4. For the asst. yr. 1982-83 the assessee had claimed depreciation @ 30 per cent on the following two machineries : (1) Hot Mixing Plant, and (2) Paver Finishing Machine.5. The assessee is in business of construction of road...
Tag this Judgment!ishwarbhai Narottambhai Patel Vs. K.H. Trivedi and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-24-2003
Reported in: (2003)1GLR537; (2003)3GLR1878
M.S. Shah, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 16-8-2002 rendered by the learned single Judge dismissing a group of three petitions (reported in : (2003)1GLR537 ). The present appeal is confined to the said judgment in so far as Special Civil Application No. 476 of 1993 is dismissed.2. The present appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent and the learned Counsel was called upon to address the Court on the question of maintainability of the appeal. The matter, has therefore, been heard at length on this preliminary issue.3. Before discussing the said preliminary issue, it is necessary to set out the brief facts of the case at hand.3.1 The appellant (petitioner of Special Civil Application No. 476 of 1993 Durlabbhai P. Patel) and others were members of the Executive Committee of Shree Khedut Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandali Ltd., a registered Co-operative Society, at Bardoli in Surat District (hereinafter referred to as 'the Society'). The society ha...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. Hasmukhlal Gandalal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-24-2003
Reported in: (2003)184CTR(Guj)23; [2003]264ITR42(Guj)
A.R. Dave, J. :1.At the instance of the Revenue, the following question of law has been referred to this Court for its opinion by the Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B' under the provisions of Section 27(1) of the WT Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') : 'Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the cancellation of the penalties levied by the WTO under Section 18(l)(c) of the WT Act?' 2. Standing counsel Ms. Mauna Bhatt has appeared for the applicant Revenue, whereas nobody has appeared for the respondent-assessee, though the respondent-assessee has been duly served with the notice of this Court.3. The facts giving rise to this reference, in a nutshell, are as under :4. The assessee filed his wealth-tax return showing value of his property named Geeta Talkies as Rs. 3,36,485. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the WTO asked the assessee to get the said property valued by an approved valuer and, therefore, the assessee got the said property v...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat Vs. Sipu Project Employees Association
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-24-2003
Reported in: (2004)1GLR552
J.N. Bhatt, Acting C.J. 1. Admit. Service of notice is waived by learned advocate Mr. Saurabh J. Mehta for the respondent. Upon joint request, this Letters Patent Appeal is taken up for final hearing today itself.2. The core issue in focus in this Letters Patent Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent Appeal has been as to whether the employees of Sipu Project and members of the Sipu Project Employees Association, respondent herein, are eligible and qualified for project allowance or not, to which the learned single Judge has, upon consideration of the facts and circumstances, adjudicated and decided in favour of the respondent, original petitioner and, therefore, this Letters Patent Appeal, at the instance of the State of Gujarat.3. We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties dispassionately and we have scanned and scrutinised the material documentary evidence on record and the relevant and material resolutions of the Government on the issue, coupled with the te...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. Chandrakant Gandalal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-23-2003
Reported in: (2003)184CTR(Guj)517
A.R. Dave, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question of the law has been referred to this Court for its opinion by the Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B', under the provisions of Section 27(1) of the WT Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') :'Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts, in confirming the cancellation of the penalties levied by the WTO under Section 18(1)(c) of the WT Act.'2. Standing counsel Ms. Mauna Bhatt has appeared for the applicant Revenue, whereas nobody has appeared for the respondent-assessee, though the respondent-assessee has been duly served with the notice of this Court.3. The facts giving rise to this reference, in a nutshell, are as under:4. The assessee filed his wealth-tax return showing value of his building situated at Porbandar as Rs. 2,22,000. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the WTO asked the assessee to get the building valued by an approved valuer and, therefore, the assessee got the said building v...
Tag this Judgment!Topline Shoes Ltd. Vs. Corporation Bank
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-23-2003
Reported in: II(2004)BC61; [2005]126CompCas47(Guj)
Jayant Patel, J.1. Rule. Mr.Panesar waives service of rule on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 & 2. With the consent of the parties matter is taken for final hearing.2. The present petition arises against the order, dated 18.6.03 passed by the Chairperson of the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Bombay (hereinafter referred to as 'the Appellate Authority') below application in Misc.Appeal No.218/03 whereby the prayer for interim stay has been rejected and the matter is posted for hearing on 14.8.03.3. The contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is that the petitioner through the petitioner No.2 who appears as party in person and his counterclaim application is pending and not only that but in the said counterclaim application the petitioner-company is permitted to sue as an indigent person and after such permission was granted the order is stayed for some time against which the appeal is preferred being Misc.Appeal No.215/03 by the respondent-Bank and the hearing of the said appeal is...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »