Gujarat Court July 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.
Madresa-e-garibnawaz Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-14-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Guj65
Jayant Patel, J.1 Rule. Mr.Dave, learned AGP waives service of rule on behalf of respondents No.1 and 3 and Mr.Raval, learned Counsel for Mr.A.D.Oza appears and waives service of rule on behalf of respondent No.2. With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.2. The short facts of the case are that the petitioner has applied for registration of the school and the said application of the petitioner was not accepted by the Board. The petitioner carried the matter before the State Government in appeal. Ultimately, the State Government, as per the order dated 18th September, 2003 allowed the appeal and granted permission to open the school. After the aforesaid order was passed by the State Government in appeal, it appears that the respondent Board communicated to the petitioner as per the letter dated 15-4-2004 intimating that the permission granted in pursuance of the order of the State Government is cancelled and it is under these circumstances the petit...
Sita Ram Singhania Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-13-2004
Reported in: (2005)2GLR1298
C.K. Buch, J.1. The petitioners of both these Revision Applications are the accused of Criminal Case Nos.1947/95 and 1949/95, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (4th Court) at Vadodara. The respondent no.2-Gujarat State Fertilizers Company Ltd., Vadodara (hereinafter referred to as 'the GSFC') is the orig.complainant of the aforesaid criminal cases instituted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1938 (hereinafter referred to as 'the NI Act'). A criminal complaint came to be filed against four accused persons. However, as the accused no.3 could not be served by the orig. complainant, he has been deleted from the complaint vide order dated 14th October, 2003, passed by the Court below Exh.49 submitted by the orig.complainant. The accused no.4 is Esslon Synthetics Ltd. and as per the say of the complainant-GSFC, the accused no.1 was the Managing Director of the said company and the accused no.2 was the whole time Dire...
Gujarat Lease Financing Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-12-2004
Reported in: [2005]62SCL511(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. This petition is filed under Section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956 for sanction of a scheme of compromise with the consortium of 16 Banks being the Secured Creditors of the petitioner Company.2. The petitioner Company is a public limited Company which is engaged in the field of financial services. It is a Non-Banking Financial Company (NBFC) and had a good track record till 1996 - 97. However, Company's position dramatically changed since 1997- 98. A lot of factors contributed to the downfall of NBFC industry. During that period, various sectors of Indian economy were going through recessionary conditions and the industrial activity slowed down due to law GDP growth, sagging markets, low investor confidence, etc. A number of NBFCs were downgraded by the rating agencies leading to an overall drop in investor confidence. In order to safeguard the interest of public, especially the small investors, Reserve Bank of India (RBI) imposed stringent policies and conditions on NB...
Amreli Municipality Vs. Gujarat Pradesh Municipal Employees Union
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: (2004)3GLR1841; (2005)ILLJ592Guj
K.R. Vyas, J.1. This group of petitions has been referred to us in view of different observations of two Division Benches on the point as to whether the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal can order regularisation of services to a local authority which is a public body in which there is no availability of sanctioned set-up as per the provisions of Municipalities Act.1.1 The learned single Judge, while hearing Special Civil Application No. 5646 of 1999 and Special Civil Application No. 5750 of 1999, was shown two different views expressed by Division Bench in the case of Kalol Municipality v. Shantaben, reported in : (1994)IILLJ362Guj and in the case of Halvad Nagarpalika and Ors. v. Jani Dipakbhai Chandravadanbhai and Ors., reported in 2003 (4) GLR 3229 : 2003 (2) GHCJ 397,1.2 In Special Civil Application No. 5746 of 1999, the petitioner Amreli Municipality has challenged the legality and validity of award dated 12-3-1999 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Bhavnagar in Reference (IT) Nos....
Niraj Jayantibhai Patel Through Guardian/Father Vs. Regional Passport ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Guj1
D.N. Patel, J.1. The petitioner has preferred this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby, he seeks direction against the respondent authority, to carry out necessary change in the date of birth of the petitioner in the Passport, on the basis of the document placed at Annexure-C to the petition.2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent authority submits that no error has been committed by the respondent authority and that the date of birth mentioned in the passport was in accordance with the representation made by the petitioner.3. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondent authority is directed to carry out necessary change in the date of birth of the petitioner in the Passport, after verifying the genuineness and the correctness of the document/s which may be produced before it. As the error has been committed by the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to deposit Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) as costs, with the respo...
Jitendrabhai Chunibhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: (2004)3GLR560
M.S. Shah, J.1. Both these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution challenge the notification dated 13.1.2003 (Annexure 'A') of the State Government in the Agriculture & Co-operation Department declaring the intention of the State Government to denotify the separate market area of APMC, Dascroi and to amalgamate the area of the Dascroi taluka in Ahmedabad District into the market area comprising of the Ahmedabad City taluka including the Municipal Corporation Limits and to regulate the sale and purchase of various specified foodgrains, vegetables, pulses and fruits in the market area comprising the Ahmedabad City taluka (including Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation limits) and Dascroi taluka. By the said notification, the State Government also cancelled the election programme earlier declared by the Director of Agricultural Marketing & Rural Finance.2. The facts leading to filing of these petitions, briefly stated, are as under :-2.1 Prior to 2000, the market area of the erstwhile...
Kundanben Jayantilal Sanghvi Vs. State Bank of Saurashtra
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-07-2004
Reported in: [2005]126CompCas666(Guj); [2004]56SCL456(Guj)
Jayant Patel, J.1. Rule. Mr. A.S. Vakil, learned Counsel for the respondent Bank waives service of notice of rule. With the consent of the parties the matter is taken up for final hearing today.2. The short facts of the case are that the petitioners are claiming the right as purchaser of the property under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act under the agreement to sell with part performance and the said property appears to have been mortgaged with the respondent Bank. It is the case of the petitioners that when the petitioners purchased the property, it was not disclosed to them that the property is mortgaged with the Bank. It also appears that as per the petitioners the property was mortgaged in the year 1988 and the agreement to sell upon which the reliance is placed by the petitioners has entered into in the year 1990. Even if the original documents, copy whereof is produced on page 20 is considered, the stamp paper is purchased on 29-1-1986, whereas it is used for entering ...
Modi Rajkumar Kishanlal Vs. Swashryi Mahila Seva Sangh (Seva) (Through ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-06-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Guj38
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.1. This Appeal From Order is filed against order dated 1st October, 2003 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad below Exh.6 and Exh.23 in Civil Suit No. 2199 of 2001. The learned Judge was pleased to reject Exh.6-Application i.e. Notice of Motion taken out by the plaintiff and was pleased to allow Exh.23-Application i.e. Notice of Motion taken out by the defendant.2. The subject matter of the suit is a dispute between the parties with regard to use of staircase. The relief prayed for by the appellant, original plaintiff, is that the respondent, original defendant, should not obstruct the use of staircase. As against that, the defendant has prayed that the plaintiff should not use the staircase as he has no right to use the same.3. The facts of the case, which warrant mention, are: the defendant had purchased two upper plaza offices No. 22 and 23 in 1993 in Goyal Towers, whereas the plaintiff is the owner of one shop on the ground floor of the same ...
Pathan Umravkhan Amirkhan Vs. Shakinaben W/D. Umravmiya
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-02-2004
Reported in: (2004)3GLR489
1. Widow Shakinaben and her sons - original petitioners had filed Special Civil Application No. 7239 of 1989 before this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, with following prayers made in Para: 21 of the Petition:(a) to quash and set aside the order of the Mamlatdar and ALT dtd.23.10. 1984 at Annexure:C, and the order of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal passed in TEN. B.A. 446 of 1985 dtd. 5.8.1988 at Annexure:E, and also the order of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in Review Application No. TEN. C.A. 43/88 dtd. 21.7.1989 at Annexure:F.(b) to confirm the Judgment and order of the Deputy Collector, Kheda dtd. 20.5.1985 in Tenancy Appeal No. 628 of 1984 at Annexure:D, and(c) to dismiss the application filed by the respondent under Sec. 70-B of the Act, and(d) to remand the case to decide according to law.'2. Before the learned Single Judge, on behalf of the original petitioners, it was submitted that the learned Mamlatdar and ALT, Thasra, had wrongly allowed the Application of...
O.L. of Piramal Financial Services Ltd. Vs. Dena Bank
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-02-2004
Reported in: [2004]122CompCas967(Guj); [2005]63SCL558(Guj)
K.M. Mehta, J.1. The Official Liquidator has filed this report in petition No. 147 of 2001 with a prayer that this Court may ratify the action taken by the Official Liquidator for taking possession of the assets of the company i.e. M/s.Piramal Financial Services Pvt.Ltd. (in liquidation). He has further prayed that this Court may direct the present occupant i.e. Shri D.P.Shah to submit original sale deed before this Court and M/s.Radhe Associates may be made party to the proceedings.BRIEF RELEVANT FACTS:2. Piramal Financial Services Ltd. was a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. Reserve Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as 'RBI') preferred Company Petition No. 147 of 2000 praying that Piramal Financial Services Ltd. be wound up by and under the provisions of Section 45A of the Reserve Bank of India Act. This Court on 20th October, 2000, admitted the said petition and appointed Official Liquidator as Provisional Liquidator of Piramal Financial Services Ltd. (since r...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »