Gujarat Court September 2005 Judgments
Bholabhai Chaturbhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-26-2005
Reported in: (2005)3GLR2549
C.K. Buch, J.1. The petitioner is the original accused, who came to be arrested on 22nd October, 2002, in connection with C.R. No.I-452 of 2002 registered with Naranpura Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 167, 406, 409, 467, 468, 471, 477 r/w. Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 46 of the Banking Regulation Act. The petitioner has introduced himself in paragraph:2 of the memo of the petition as a law abiding citizen of the country, having graduated in Science and Law. It is contended that he had started legal practice in the year 1953 and joined public life in the year 1960 as a Social Worker at Visnagar. It is not necessary to mention various activities mentioned in paragraph:2 of the memo of the petition because these aspects were brought to the notice of the Court initially when the petitioner had approached this Court for bail after his arrest and when he had attempted to get regular bail even pending investigation of the crime. But i...
Tag this Judgment!Morvi Taluka Panchayat and anr. Vs. Vikramsinh Gambhirsinh and 3 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-22-2005
Reported in: 2006ACJ1448; (2005)3GLR2372
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. Through this appeal, judgment of MACT (Main) Rajkot District (District Judge) Rajkot District in MAC Case No. 382/85 dated 9.5.88 is challenged.Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment ?2. Shortly stated, claimant was cleaner in the Revenue Department Government of Gujarat, earning Rs. 450.00 per month apart from Rs. 8/- to Rs. 10/- from the tea hand cart in his free time, total earning Rs. 700.00. Accident took place at about 12.30 p.m. (noon). Driver (Opponent No. 1) was driving offending tanker He had been engaged by Morbi Taluka Panchayat (Opponent No. 4). Tanker belonged to Revenue Department, Government of Gujarat (Opponent No. 2). It was insured with M/s. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (Opponent No. 3). Allegation is that tanker was being driven at excessive speed, rashly and negligently, thereby endangering human life on the road. It turned turtle and claimant sustained injuries. Ultimately, his right leg was amputed. He was 22 ye...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Broach Textile Mills Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-22-2005
Reported in: (2006)200CTR(Guj)142; [2006]280ITR335(Guj)
H.N. Devani, J. 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench SC has referred the following question under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) at the instance of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad.Whether, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the Income Tax Officer to exclude the repairs and insurance expenses on motor car for the purpose of calculating disallowance under Section 37(3A) of the Income Tax Act?2. The assessment year is 1984-85, and the relevant accounting period is 1-4-1983 to 31-3-1984. During the relevant previous year, the assessee had incurred motor car expenses amounting to Rs. 2,84,030/-, which included repairs and insurance expenses. The assessing officer took into consideration the entire motor car expenses for the purpose of calculating disallowance under Section 37(3A) of the Act. The assessee's contention that the expenses towards motor car repairs and insurance should not be considered for ascertaini...
Tag this Judgment!Jawahar Maghji Sindhi Bansali and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-22-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ1717; (2006)1GLR719
Bankim N. Mehta, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the appellants-convicts challenging the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Junagadh on 6-6-2002 rendered in Sessions Case No. 149 of 1994 convicting the appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 read with Section 114 of Indian Penal Code directing the appellant No. 1-Jawahar Meghjibhai to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three years and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default thereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment of two months for the offence punishable under Section 498-A and to undergo rigorous imprisonment of seven years and to pay fine of Rs. 3,000/- in default thereof to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three months for the offence punishable under Section 306 and convicting appellant No. 2-Meghjibhai Hemantdas to undergo sentence of rigorous imprisonment of three years and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default thereof to undergo rigorous imprisonm...
Tag this Judgment!Radhe Associates and anr. Vs. O.L. of Piramal Financial Service Ltd. a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-21-2005
Reported in: [2007]135CompCas251(Guj)
D.A. Mehta, J. 1 This appeal challenges judgment and order made by learned Single Judge on 02/07/2004 in OLR No. 56 of 2003.2 The appellant No. 1 is a partnership firm and appellant No. 2 is a partner of appellant No. 1-Firm. One Piramal Financial Services Limited (PFSL) was directed to be wound up by an order dated 20/03/2001 and the Official Liquidator attached to this Court was appointed as liquidator of PFSL. In pursuance of the aforesaid order the liquidator was directed by an order dated 20/07/2001 made by the Court in Company Application No. 44 of 2000 to take possession of all the properties and assets, more particularly described in Schedule 'A' of the report of the Official Liquidator dated 12/07/2001. As a consequence the liquidator was to take possession of the property described as office/shop No. 103, 1st Floor, Ganesh Plaza, Opp. Navrangpura Bus-stand, Ahmedabad admeasuring 2256 sq.ft. approximately (hereinafter referred to as 'the property in question'). When the repres...
Tag this Judgment!Gamon India Ltd. Vs. Sheth Estate Developers Pvt. Ltd. and 2 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-21-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)ARBLR196(Gujarat); (2006)1GLR541
R.S. Garg, J.1. Present is an appeal under Section 39 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 against the order dated 31.3.98 passed by the learned 7th Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division), Vadodara in Special Civil Suit No. 151 of 1994, granting the application filed by the present respondents under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act and further directing that Mr. M.D. Deshmukh, Ex-Secretary of Maharashtra State Government be appointed as an Arbitrator and he shall proceed further in the matter, arbitrate into the dispute and submit his award within four months from the date of the order. 2. Plaintiffs/respondents filed an application under Section 20 read with Section 8, so also under Section 33 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), requiring the Court to grant the application, requisition the agreements allegedly in possession of the non-applicant/present appellant and appoint an Arbitrator in terms of the agreements. It was contended that the present a...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat Vs. Ashokumar Shitaldas Firm and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-20-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ1204; (2005)3GLR2725
S.R. Brahmbhatt, J.1. The appellant State of Gujarat has preferred the present appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the order of acquittal dated 26/9/1995 passed by learned JMFC, Deesa, in Criminal Case No. 557 of 1983, acquitting the accused of the charges under Section 7 and 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' ). This Court (Coram: A.N. Divecha, J) admitted the appeal vide order dated 9/1/1997.2. The record shows that this Court (Coram: D.H. Waghela, J) on 18/7/2002 passed an order that the appeal would abate as far as the Respondent no. 2 - Shitaldas Hotchand is concerned, as he has died. The appeal was ordered to be fixed for final hearing in respect of other original accused No. 1 and 3 Respondents No. 1 and 3 in regular course.3. The case of the prosecution in short is that the original complainant Food Inspector / Respondent No. 4 while serving as such, visited the shop of the accused o...
Tag this Judgment!Bharatiya Technical Institute Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-20-2005
Reported in: (2006)2GLR981
C.K. Buch, J.1. Heard Mr. H.S. Tolia, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. U. R. Bhatt, learned A.G.P., appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.2.1 By way of this petition, the petitioner has assailed legality and validity of the order dated 12th January, 2005, passed by the learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Surat, below Application Exh. 8 in Summary Suit No. 6 of 2004 invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2.2 The petitioner is the original plaintiff, whereby he has prayed for decree for recovery of amount of Rs. 16,31,21,000/- on allegation that he is entitled to the said amount because he has supplied agricultural equipment, etc. at the instance and order of the respondent-State. Notice was served by the plaintiff to the respondent-defendant under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure before instituting the cause. The suit is filed under Order 37, and therefore, after service of summons for appearance, the defendants were...
Tag this Judgment!Ushaben Jitendrakumar Dholariya Vs. Bhagvanjibhai Chakubhai Ughad
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-19-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Guj18
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.1. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking protection of her fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India, by filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner has also mentioned the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in the cause title of the petition. But then what is prayed is, 'the Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or writ of certiorari or writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside the judgement and order passed by the learned Joint District Judge, 3rd Fast Track Court, Gondal in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 70 of 2001 dated May 30, 2005.'2. The reasons for which a writ of certiorari under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for quashing the judgement and order of a subordinate court, are known to either the petitioner herself or her learned counsel. Similarly protection of which fundamental right...
Tag this Judgment!Navpad Textile Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-19-2005
Reported in: 2009[13]STR460
ORDERD.A. Mehta, J.1. Heard Mr. Dhaval Shah, the learned advocate for the petitioner.2. This petition primarily challenges the order dated 26-3-2004 made by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zone, Mumbai.3. As the facts reveal, the petitioner had moved the stay application before the Tribunal against the order quantifying amount of duty at Rs. 76,42,921/- along with penalty of Rs. 52,64,948/- and Rs. 24,00,000/- on the petitioner. After hearing both the sides, the Tribunal found that this was a case of undervaluation, the petitioner having indicated one valuation on central excise invoice and another on the commercial invoice. Therefore, it was held that the petitioner had not been able to make out any case in favour of full waiver of pre-deposit under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (the Act). Accordingly, the Tribunal directed the petitioner to deposit 50% of duty by 30th April 2003 and report compliance on 5-5-2003. Upon such pre-deposit being ma...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »