Gujarat Court June 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.
Rasikbhai Sankaleshwar Trivedi Vs. Sanjaybhai Babubhai Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-16-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Guj315
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.1. This Appeal from Order is filed against an order passed below Ex.6 in Special Civil Suit No.226/2002 dated 31/01/03. Application 6 was filed for interim relief, wherein the Court had initially passed an order on 25/11/02, issuing 'Notice to show cause', returnable on 30/11/02.2. The case of the plaintiff is that, the plaintiff had executed a Power of Attorney on 28/03/91 in favour of defendant no.1 (Sanjay Babubhai Patel). According to the plaintiff the said Power of Attorney was for limited purpose that is, for getting the land in question converted from new tenure to old tenure; that the defendant no.1 has sold that land, though he was not authorized for the same, in favour of defendants no.2 to 4. The plaintiff has therefore filed the suit for declaration to the effect that defendant no.1 did not have any power to sell the land in favour of defendants no.2 to 4; that the sale deeds executed in favour of defendants no.2 to 4 by defendant no.1 be cancelled and a...
Jay Chemical Industries Proprietory Concern Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-16-2004
Reported in: (2005)1GLR86
M.S. Shah, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges the order dated 5.3.1982 passed by the Assistant Collector of Customs, Drawback Department, Bombay, respondent No. 3 herein, rejecting the petitioner's claim for drawback of customs duty and also the communication dated 31.8.1984 from the Collector of Customs, Bombay, respondent No. 2 herein, rejecting the petitioner's application for review under Section 130(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 as not maintainable.2. The short facts giving rise to this petition, as averred by the petitioner, are as under: -2.1 The petitioner is a small scale industrial unit manufacturing and exporting dyestuff. In the year 1981, the petitioner engaged the services of Clearing House Agent M/s Eastern Shipping Agency, Bombay and sent them the export documents for export consignment of 40 drums of dyestuff for export to Hong Kong. The contract was in US Dollar on CIF value basis. The clearing house agent prepared shipping bills and dec...
Rasayanik Kamdar Sangh Vs. Amal Products Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-16-2004
Reported in: [2005(104)FLR83]
Jayant Patel, J.1. Short facts of the case are that the petitioner is the employees' union of the respondent-company. In the year 1999, a charter of demands was submitted for various items including increase in salary in various grades, increase in House Rent Allowance, leave travel allowance, garden allowance, education allowance, privilege allowance, canteen facilities, medical facilities, dress allowance etc. It appears that thereafter the matter was referred to the industrial tribunal for adjudication being Ref. (IT) No. 106/02. It is an admitted position that the reference is pending before the tribunal. However, pending the said reference, the petitioner-Union has submitted an application for interim relief in the month of March, 2004 contending that the respondent-company is contemplating to sell its units and if the properties are sold by transferring of the company or sale of the unit, it would frustrate the main reference and therefore injunction was prayed for prohibiting th...
Gujarat State Marketing Co-op. Federation Ltd. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-15-2004
Reported in: (2004)3GLR502
D.H. Waghela, J.1. These petitions are grouped and heard together as they involve the common issue of the validity of sub-section (2) of Section 80 of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short). However, the petitions are required to be divided into three sub-groups viz. the petitions in which show cause notices to appoint nominee directors were issued, where appointment orders of such nominees were already issued, and the petitions filed only on the basis of apprehension of such appointments by the Government.2. The relevant Section 80 of the Act reads as under:'S. 80 Power to appoint Government Nominee:(1) Where the State Government has subscribed to the share capital of a society, directly or through another society, or has guaranteed the repayment of the principal of and payment of interest on, debentures issued or loans raised by a society, the State Government shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the bye-laws of such society, have the right to nomi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›