Gujarat Court August 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.
Ambalal Nandlal Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: (2004)3GLR2588
J.R. Vora, J.1. This appeal is preferred under the provisions of Section 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 is addressed against judgment and order delivered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana, on 8th of November, 1996, convicting the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, rigorous imprisonment for three months. The appellant was prosecuted but acquitted of the charge levelled against him for the offence punishable under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. However, this acquittal is not the subject-matter of change by the State Government.2. Deceased and victim in this case is father while accused-appellant herein happens to be his son. Prosecution story discloses that the incident in question occurred on 14th April, 1996 at about 3-00 p.m. at village Ambod, Taluka Mansa of Mehsana District. The appellant had some dispute against his father in respect of money, wh...
R.D. Kalva Vs. Housing Commisioner
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-04-2004
Reported in: (2005)1GLR551
P.B. Majmudar, J.1. Since common point is involved in both these petitions, both these petitions are taken up for final hearing, together.2. The petitioner of each of these petitions has approached this Court by way of the respective Special Civil Applications in the year 1992, as, at that time, they were apprehending their reversion / termination from the posts which they are holding, i.e. from the posts of Junior Assistant.3. In the year 1983, the Gujarat Housing Board invited applications for making appointment to the posts of Junior Clerk from candidates belonging to the reserved category of Scheduled Tribe. Both the petitioners applied for getting appointment to the said posts. Along with the applications, necessary certificates were also produced for the purpose of showing that the petitioner of each of these petitions belongs to Scheduled Tribe. A copy of such certificate is also annexed as Annexure 'A' in the petitions. The respondent-Board, thereafter, appointed the petitioner...
G.S.R.T.C. Vs. Lallubhai K. Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-04-2004
Reported in: [2005(106)FLR495]
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. The petitioner- Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation [ GSRTC ] has assailed the judgment and award, recorded by the Labour Court, Valsad, on 29.8.1992, in a Reference (LCV) No.99/90 under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, whereby, the reference came to be partly allowed, directing the petitioner Corporation to reinstate the respondent driver on his original post with continuity of service and with full backwages, by quashing and setting aside the order of termination from service of the Corporation, which was passed by the petitioner, after holding departmental inquiry on the ground of indiscipline, fraud, repeated and continued negligence in his working, taking part directly in the politics and contesting the election of Gram Panchyat, and non disclosure of such participation in politics etc. and thereby, committing violation of the provisions of Item No.7,10, 12 (A), 27 and 37 highlighting the acts of misconduct in Schedule A of Discipline and A...
Jivraj Vashrambhai Kanjaria Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-03-2004
Reported in: [2005(104)FLR679]; (2005)1GLR681
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.1. The petitioner has approached this Court for the relief that the respondents be directed to pay arrears of pension from 01.01.1992 onwards with interest at the rate of 18%; that the respondents be further directed to pay regular pension to the petitioner in future. The petitioner also prayed for awarding the cost of the petition. The petition was filed on 08.10.2001 and notice was issued on 17.10.2001 for final disposal returnable on 07.11.2001. Thereafter, the Court was pleased to issue 'Rule' on 18.01.2002 returnable on 06.03.2002. The matter was on Board for final hearing and was adjourned from time to time. On 06.02.2004, when matter was on Board for final hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader referred to and relied upon an affidavit filed by one Mr.Y.P. Pathak, Deputy Executive Engineer, City R & B Sub-Division, Jamnagar of respondent no.2 affirmed on 10.03.2003, wherein it is stated that,'... ... As per letter dated 13.12.1983 the petitioner was...
Viramji Mohatji Thakore Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-03-2004
Reported in: (2005)2GLR1622
J.M. Panchal, J.1. Instant appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is directed against judgment dated August 7, 1996, rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana, in Sessions Case No.95 of 1996, by which the appellant is convicted of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for life and fine of Rs.500/-, in default, R.I. for three months.2. Deceased Manjuben Ramaji Thakor was married to Ramaji Mansangji Thakor before 8 years of the incident which took place on February 5, 1996 and was residing with her husband and three minor daughters at village Sundhia, Taluka : Kheralu, District : Mehsana. On February 4, 1996, a religious discourse was arranged in front of house of one Thakor Kavaji in the Maholla where house of deceased Manjulaben Thakor was situated. The appellant, who is neighbour and family nephew of the deceased, had approached the deceased and asked the deceased to submit to his...
Shah Textiles Limited Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-03-2004
Reported in: 2005(183)ELT421(Guj)
ORDERM.S. Shah, J.1. Heard Mr. Parikh for the petitioner and Mr. Malkan, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Central Government for the respondents.2. What is challenged in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is the order dated 24-5-2004 [2004 (170) E.L.T. 358 (Tri. - Mumbai)] rendered by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai allowing the Revenue's appeal and setting aside the finding of the Commissioner as well as the Assistant Commissioner that 'Dyed D/C Book binding cloth' being manufactured by the petitioner-company falls under Chapter Heading 52.06. The Tribunal took the view that the goods will fall under Chapter Heading 5901.10.3. At the hearing of this petition, Mr. D.V. Parikh, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that apart from the fact that the petitioner-company was represented by its Director who was not well-versed with the law on the subject and, therefore, could not cite several decisions in favour of the petitione...
Ambica Trading Co. Vs. Shree Bansidhar Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-02-2004
Reported in: [2005]127CompCas188(Guj); [2005]58SCL179(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. Both these petitions are filed under Section 433(e) read with Section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 for winding up of the respondent Company, namely, Shree Bansidhar Pvt. Ltd. Since the respondent Company is same in both the petitions and subject matter of both the petitions are also same, they are being disposed of by common order.2. In Company Petition No. 4 of 2002, it is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has been carrying on the business of dealing in various items of fabrics and other miscellaneous items and used to send clothes to the Company for processing and regular bills for the same were issued on account of this and timely payments were also received. The petitioner used to give to the Company a large amount of money in advance and the bills issued by the Company for processing charges were being adjusted against the said advance. After clearing all the bills raised by the Company for claiming processing charges out of the amount paid in advance...
Ramanbhai Mahijibhai Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-02-2004
Reported in: (2005)2GLR1053
K.M. Mehta, J.1. Ramanbhai Mahijibhai, Shantilal Mahijibhai and others, petitioners, have filed this petition with a prayer that this Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned order passed by the respondent Special Land Acquisition Officer, Vadodara. The respondent by his impugned order has rejected the application of the petitioners under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The petitioners further prayed that this Court may also be pleased to direct the respondent to allow the application of the petitioners under Section 28A of the Act according to the judgement and order passed by passed by the Reference Court in L.R.C. No. 575 of 1992 to 580 of 1992 and Land Reference Case Nos. 1647/1990 to 1667 of 1990 dated 29.4.1997 and further direct the respondent to immediately pay the amount of compensation according to the judgement of the Reference Court by way of issuing suitable writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Co...
Jivanbhai Shivabhai Garoda Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-02-2004
Reported in: (2005)1GLR1
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. Petitioners were serving in the Security Force, a Branch in the Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Limited (IPCL) Baroda, till 1972. Sometime during this year, Director General, Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), proposed to Management of IPCL that policy of the Central Government required security of CISF to protect --------------------------------------------------------- oted Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? the Industries of the Government. Therefore, Security Force maintained by IPCL was sought to be inducted into CISF. When this proposal was conveyed to the employees of Security Force of IPCL, which included the petitioners and some other employees, induction was protested since it would cause injustice and inconvenience to the petitioners. It was stated that induction into CISF would mean transfer anywhere in India, which was neither conducive nor in the interest of the petitioners. Moreover, they had been engaged ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›