Gujarat Court December 2006 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.
Patel Jagdish Haribhai Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-06-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ1297; (2007)2GLR1684
C.K. Buch, J.1. The present appeal is filed against the order of conviction and sentence passed by learned Special Judge, Amreli in a prosecution instituted for the offence punishable under the Essential Commodities Act. The learned Judge, vide order of conviction and sentence dated 31st January, 1991, on conclusion of the trial of Essential Commodities Act Case No. 10 of 1985, convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 7(1)(a) of the Essential Commodities Act and sentenced the accused to suffer three months. Simple Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default, to undergo Simple Imprisonment for one month.2. The impugned order is assailed on various grounds mentioned in para 3 of the memo of appeal and Mr. H.N. Joshi, learned Counsel appearing with learned Senior counsel Mr. P.M. Thakkar has taken me through these grounds of challenge on behalf of the appellant accused and so also the judgment.2.1 It is argued that the finding of the lower court is er...
State of Gujarat Vs. Sayaji Mills No. 1
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-06-2006
Reported in: (2008)11VST650(Guj)
J.M. Panchal, J.1. The Gujarat Sales Tax Tribunal at Ahmedabad has referred the following questions of law for decision of this court under Section 69 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 ('the Act', for short).(1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, whether the Tribunal is not right in holding that the transfer of the entire mill by the opponent company, viz., M/s. Sayaji Mills Limited to Shri Keshariya Investment Limited was not a sale of goods, within the meaning of Section 2(12) of the Act, effected during the course of the opponent company's business and, therefore, the sale of proceeds were not liable to attract any tax under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969?(2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, whether the Tribunal is not right in holding that as the entire sale has been effected on the basis of lump sum consideration for transferring the concern, and not only right, title and interest are transferred, but even the debts and liabilities have also bee...
H.G. Modi and 5 ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-05-2006
Reported in: (2007)3GLR2488
Anant S. Dave, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is preferred by the petitioners, who were employees of the Government Engineering Colleges of State of Gujarat. At the relevant point of time, all the petitioners were in service and particulars regarding service of the petitioners are provided as per the chart annexed at Annexure-A to the petition. The petitioner Nos. 1, 3 and 6 are Assistant Professor, while petitioner Nos. 2 and 5 are Professors and petitioner No. 4 is the Principal. In this petition, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:(a) to direct the respondents to give benefit of the increasede age of superannuation of 62 years to the petitioners - teachers of Engineering Colleges w.e.f. 31.7.1998 as directed by the Central Government and the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) vide communications dated 31.7.1998, 2.9.1998 and 9.10.1998 as per Annexure-B colly and to further direct the respondents to continue th...
Shree Vidhya Vikas Mandal and 51 ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and 6 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-04-2006
Reported in: (2007)1GLR479
D.A. Mehta, J.1. This petition prays for following reliefs:21. The petitioners, therefore, pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:A. admit this Special Civil Application.B. issue a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction against the respondents declaring the Government Resolutions dated 21.05.1994 and 21.12.1994 as unconstitutional, illegal and quash and set aside the same by issuing a writ, order or direction.C. pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this Special Civil Application the operation, execution and implementation of Government Resolutions dated 21.5.1994 and 21.12.1994 at Annexure 'D' (collectively) be stayed and the respondents be directed not to implement the provisions of the said Government Resolutions.D. Pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this Special Civil Application, the operation, execution and implementation of the order dated 11.11.1997 passed by the District Education Officer, M...
Employees State Insurance Corporation Vs. Vasantbhai Bhudarbhai Parmar
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-04-2006
Reported in: (2007)1GLR879; (2007)IIILLJ263Guj
P.B. Majmudar, J.1. This Appeal is filed by Employees State Insurance Corporation under Section 82 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the E.S.I. Act).2. An appeal under Section 82 of the E.S.I. Act would be maintainable only when there is a substantial question of law. However, looking to the scheme of the Act, it is not necessary that substantial question of law is required to be framed by the Judge like second appeal under the provisions of Civil Procedure Code.3. Section 82 of the E.S.I. Act reads as under:82. Appeal.(1) Save as expressly provided in this Section, no appeal shall lie from an order of an Employees' Insurance Court.(2) An appeal shall lie to the High Court from an order of an Employees' Insurance Court if it involved a substantial question of law.(3) The period of Limitation for an appeal under this Section shall be sixty days.(4) The provisions of Sections 5 and 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963) shall apply to appeals un...
Parshottamdas Haribhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-01-2006
Reported in: (2007)2GLR1675
C.K. Buch, J.1. Heard Shri D. N. Vakil, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of H. L. Patel Advocates for the appellant and Shri A. J. Desai, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.2. The present appeal is against the judgment and order of rejection of the Misc. Criminal Application No. 383 of 1996, claiming muddamal articles after conclusion of the trial in Sessions Case No. 97 of 1994. The said Sessions case has been disposed of by the Sessions Court on 28th July, 1995. The learned trial Judge vide impugned order rejected the request to return the valuable muddamal recovered during the course of investigation of crime registered with Khanpur Police Station vide C.R. No. 1-12 of 1993 for the offences punishable under Sections 395 and 397, etc. of the Indian Penal Code. The backbone of the submissions of Shri Vakil is that the main accused who were tried by the Court of Sessions had not claimed, however, so far as the gold and silver ingots are...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›