Gujarat Court May 2004 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.
Gujarat State Co-op. Agri and Rural Develop Bank Ltd. Vs. Yoginiben An ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-14-2004
Reported in: (2004)2GLR698
Akshay H. Mehta, J.1. In this petition, which is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the award made by the Labour Court, Kalol dated 1st July, 2000 in Reference (LCK) No. 348 of 1995. By the said award the petitioners have been directed to reinstate the respondent on the original post with continuity of service and to pay to her the back wages with effect from 24th December, 1997.2.0. Relevant facts in nutshell, can be stated as under :-2.1. Petitioner no. 1 is a cooperative bank registered under the provisions of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961. Respondent was appointed in the employment of petitioner no. 1 on daily wage basis by order dated 28th January, 1991. She was appointed for a period of two months. She worked till 30th January, 1991 i.e. for a period of three days. According to the respondent, her service was terminated orally without assigning any reason by the petitioners.2.2. The respondent, in the year 1995, rai...
Tushar D. Bhatt Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-14-2004
Reported in: (2004)3GLR680
Akshay H. Mehta, J.1. The petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to challenge the order of dismissal from service passed against him dated 22nd May, 2002 by the Deputy Secretary, Health & Family Welfare Department, Government of Gujarat, in the name of the Governor of Gujarat State. The said order has been passed against the petitioner in view of the fact that all the charges except one levelled against him in the departmental inquiry were proved beyond reasonable doubt. One was partly proved. The charge-sheet issued against the petitioner contained in all seven charges, details whereof will be stated in due course of the judgment.2. To appreciate the controversies that have been raised in this petition relevant facts in brief are required to be stated as under :-2.1. The petitioner joined service of respondent no. 1 as Food Inspector on 1st December, 1982 and since then he had been working in the Food & Drugs Control Administration, Governm...
Gujarat Ambuja Cement Pvt. Ltd. Vs. N.D. Rathod
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-14-2004
Reported in: (2004)2GLR2445
Akshay H. Mehta, J.1. All these petitions are directed against the common judgment and award rendered by the Judge, Labour Court at Amreli dated 23rd April, 1999 in Reference [L.C.A.] No. 139 of 1998 and its allied cases. By the said award the reference cases filed by the respondents have been allowed and the petitioner has been directed to reinstate them on their original post with continuity of service and full back wages from the date of dismissal from service till reinstatement and all other incidental benefits and also to pay a sum of Rs.500/= to each of the respondents by way of costs.1.1. Since these petitions are directed against the aforesaid common award, they are heard together and now they are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. In these petitions two major controversies are involved. First controversy has been the subject matter of number of decisions that have been rendered by the Apex Court in different cases uptill now and that is, at what stage the employer or...
Surat Dyes Vs. Arya Silk Mills Pvt.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-07-2004
Reported in: [2005]125CompCas212(Guj); [2004]56SCL497(Guj)
D.A. Mehta, J.1. The learned advocate for the applicant Mrs. Swati Soparkar seeks permission to delete respondent Nos. 2 to 6. Permission granted.2. This application has been moved by the applicant stating that there is non-compliance or violation of provisions of Section 488 of the Companies Act, 1956 ('the Act' for short) and the following prayers have been made in the Judge's Summons taken out by the applicant.'(a) to declare the failure in compliance with section 488(5) of the Companies Act, 1956 by the Arya Silk Mills Private Limited (in liquidation), (hereinafter referred to as 'the Company') and its directors being opponent No. 1 to 6.(b) to cause the compliance of section 500 to 509 and in particular section 500(1) and (2) of the Companies Act, 1956 by the company and its directors being opponent No. 1 to 6,(c) to appoint a professional chartered accountant or any other person as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit as the liquidator of the company under section 515(1) of the Compani...
Dr. K.M. Shah Vs. Dy. C.i.T.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-07-2004
Reported in: (2004)190CTR(Guj)414; [2004]270ITR408(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.1. These four appeals are filed by the assessee under Section 27A of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 against the judgment and order dated 9.1.2001 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Wealth-tax Appeal Nos. 55 to 58 of 1999 for assessment years 1991-92 to 1994-95. Since the appeals involve common questions of law and fact, by consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The appeals were admitted for considering the following substantial questions of law:-(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal substantially erred in law in dismissing the appeal of the appellant without taking into consideration the relevant material on record and without any 'speaking order' on merits?(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal substantially erred in law in interpreting the provisions of the Wealth-tax Act with regard to ...
Saiyed AmIn Akbar Miya Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-07-2004
Reported in: (2004)2GLR1545
C.K. Buch, J.1. Nine jail inmates of Sabarmati Central Prison, situated at Ahmedabad, have jointly moved this writ petition invoking the writ jurisdiction of This Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with reference to provisions of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and have prayed that appropriate writ, direction or order may kindly be issued against the respondents/authorities in terms of relief prayed mainly in sub-Paragraphs (B), (C), (D) and (E)(i) in Paragraph 16 of the petition.2. The Counsel appearing for the parties are heard in piecemeal as the parties have attempted to clarify their stand qua the dispute raised by the petitioners by filing affidavit and counter-affidavit at various stages and have also produced documents in support of their say expressed in the respective affidavits. I have gone through all the affidavits filed and the Counsel appearing for the parties have also taken me through the relevant facts stated in the affidavit filed in...
Ajendraprasadji Narendraprasadji Pande Vs. Swami Keshavprakashdasji Na ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-06-2004
Reported in: (2004)3GLR2081
C.K. Buch, J.1. This Appeal from Order under O. 43 R. 1(r) of Code of Civil Procedure (CPC for short) is preferred by the appellants- original defendants against the order dated 1.10.2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'impugned order'' passed by ld. 3rd Jt. Civil Judge (S. D.), Nadiad below application exh. 5 in Spl.Civil Suit No. 156/2002. By the impugned order, ld. Civil Judge has allowed the application exh. 5 and has granted prohibitory order restraining the appellants-original defendants from acting for themselves and with their supporters and entering the temple under Vadtal Gadi at Vadtal, Gadhada, Junagadh region under the pretext of carrying of 'Dhoon' without prior permission of the Managing Trust Board or the Government and not to organise any meeting in the above-said areas. Appellant no. 1 is further restrained by the order under challenge from discharging and/or performing any activities as 'Acharya' till final disposal of the suit.2. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with t...
Padmavati Tubes Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-06-2004
Reported in: 2005(183)ELT422(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.1. What is challenged in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is the order dated 8.7.2003 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai in Stay Application Nos. 575, 576 and 577 of 2003 (Annexure 'O') and the subsequent order dated 7.1.2004 (Annexure 'Q') of the Tribunal rejecting the petitioners' Misc. Application for modification of the order dated 8.7.2003.2. By the order dated 8.7.2003, the Tribunal has required the petitioners to make a pre-deposit of Rs.10 lakhs towards excise duty and deposit of Rs.1 lakh towards penalty imposed on the partner of petitioner No.1-firm as against the duty demand of Rs.29,23,187/and penalty of equal amount.3. What is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the Commissioner of Central Excise had passed the order-in-original dated 27.8.2002 in violation of the principles of natural justice and, therefore, the Tribunal ought to have waived deposit of the entire amounts of duty a...
Nishat Karimi Vs. Iftekhar A. Karimi
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-05-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Guj316; I(2005)DMC71
P.B. Majmudar, J. 1. In this petition, the Court is required to decide the fate of an unfortunate child, who has not been looked after by the father, who is the respondent in this revision application and who is settled in the U.S.A. It is most unfortunate that even though the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court for the City of Waynesboro, U.S.A., passed an order in favour of the child, Nida Karimi, the father has not tried to support the said child by arranging any amount for the welfare and benefit of the said child.2. The chequered history of the case is as under :-In the year 1988, mother and father lawfully got married in Indiana. Mother moved to India in 1989, where she gave birth to the couple's only child on 19.7.1989. The father remained in the United States of America and, eventually, moved to Waynesboro, to work as an Engineer.3. In view of some matrimonial dispute, the husband and wife separated. Since the husband was not taking care of the child, in the year 1995, mother...
Samixa Chhanabhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-05-2004
Reported in: (2004)3GLR1965
K.M. Mehta, J.1. Rule. Ms.Mita Panchal, learned AGP waivesservice of rule on behalf of respondents.2. Samixa Chanabhai Patel has filed the presentpetition with the prayer for a direction to therespondents to fill up 15% seats in PTC course in allGovernment, Government aided and self-financed collegeduring the admission programme of the 3rd stage for PTCcourse of the year 2003-2004. The petitioner has alsoprayed to direct the respondents to reserve 15% seats forS.T. candidates in Management Quota of Self-financed PTCcollege and further to direct the respondents to giveadmission to the petitioner on the abovesaid seats.3. The respondents issued an advertisement forPrimary Teachers Certificate Course ('PTC course forshort') somewhere on 30-6-2003. Pursuant to the saidadvertisement, the petitioner has made an application foradmission to PTC Course on 6-7-2003. It is also statedby the petitioner that 7% seats are reserved forScheduled Caste category candidates, 15% seats arereserved for Sch...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »