Gujarat Court September 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.
Vardhman Stamping Private Limited Vs. Imp Power Limited and 4 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-11-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ273
S.R. Brahmbhatt, J.1. Rule. Learned Counsel for the respective respondents waives service of rule in each of the applications.2. The group of eight Miscellaneous Criminal Applications was listed for hearing. The learned Counsels of respective parties have made submissions at length since last three days and it was kept for orders. At the request of learned Counsels for the respective parties the entire group is being finally disposed of by this common judgment.3. The petitioners have preferred these eight applications under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal procedure 1973 (herein after referred to as the Code for short)challenging the order dated 24.03.2006 passed by the Learned City Session Judge, in the Criminal Revision Applications preferred by the present Respondents and original accused in Criminal Cases filed by the present applicants against them for commission of offence punishable under Section 138 & 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 (the N.I. Act for short) discha...
Pandurang Dagdu Gayakwad and anr. Vs. Prabhakar Devaji Mora and 2 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-11-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ1705; (2007)1GLR784
Akshay H. Mehta, J.1. Original claimants have approached this Court by way of this First Appeal to challenge judgment and award of the Accident Claims Tribunal No. 1, Surat dated 4th April, 1979 passed in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 57 of 1978 since the said petition has been dismissed on the ground that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle in which the deceased was travelling.2. The appellants are the parents of deceased Vaman Pandurang, who was working as Cleaner of Truck bearing Registration No. GTC-5912, which at the relevant time was driven by respondent No. 1. The said vehicle was owned by respondent No. 2 and it was insured with respondent No. 3. The accident took place on 14th May, 1977. On that day the deceased was sitting in the truck to go to Ankleshwar to bring the bricks. It was being driver by respondent No. 1. According to the appellants, the vehicle was being driver with excessive speed and to avoid collision with a truck comi...
Gautam Trading Company Vs. Uma Transport Trading Co. and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-07-2006
Reported in: (2007)1GLR754
D.A. Mehta, J.1. Special Civil Application No. 17391 of 2006 : This petition, though styled as a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, is in effect a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner herein is a third party obstructer, respondent No. 1 is the original plaintiff of H.R.P. No. 475 of 1988 while respondent No. 2 is defendant in H.R.P.No. 475 of 1988. The suit came to be decreed in favour of the plaintiff and the defendant, after carrying the matter right upto Supreme Court, failed to get the judgment and order reversed. The plaintiff, accordingly, moved execution proceedings bearing Darkhast No. 255 of 2003. The plaintiff is thus the decree-holder and the defendant is the judgment-debtor while the petitioner herein is the third party applicant. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be accordingly referred to hereinafter.2. During pendency of execution proceedings, on 24th June, 2003 the third party applicant moved an appli...
B.i. Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-07-2006
Reported in: (2007)207CTR(Guj)227; [2007]289ITR172(Guj)
R.S. Garg, J.1. Mr. R.K. Patel, learned Counsel for Assessee. Mr Manish R. Bhatt, learned Counsel for Revenue.2. In relation to Income Tax Appeal No. 2476/Ahd/1988 for the Assessment Year 1985-86, the assessee made an application under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 that the question proposed by him be referred to the High Court for its opinion. The Tribunal rejected the said application and, therefore, the assessee came to this Court in Income Tax Application No. 56 of 1995 which was finally disposed of by Division Bench of this Court on 10.10.1995. The Court held that in the facts and circumstances of the case, question of law does arise, in the opinion of this Court. The application filed under Section 256(2) was allowed with a direction to the Tribunal to refer the question proposed by the High Court. The Tribunal accordingly, has made the Reference on the question proposed by the High Court. The question reads as -Whether in the facts and circumstances the case, when t...
Mithun Kalikrishna Banerjee Vs. Nita Pavishwar Deleted Sitanath Vishwa ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-05-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ1367
K.M. Mehta, J.1. Mithun Kalikrishna Banerjee, appellant- original claimant- petitioner has filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and award dated 1.2.2002 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.II), Ahmedabad (Rural) in MAC Petition No. 1358 of 1995. The learned Judge by his impugned award has partly allowed the claim petition and held that the petitioner is entitled to get Rs. 1,50,200/- from the opponents jointly and severally along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the claim petition filed in forma pauperis till realization.2. The appeal was filed in September 2002 and the same was admitted on 13.1.2004. Thereafter this Court fixed the hearing in July 2004. Today the matter has been heard.3. The relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are as under:3.1 The appellant- original petitioner -claimant was serving as a conductor on Crane No. DLI.T.BI.1956. Opponent No. 1- Nita Pavishwar is the driver of...
Agricultural Produce Market Committee Anklav Vs. State of Gujarat and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-04-2006
Reported in: (2007)3GLR2738
Jayant Patel, J.1. Rule. Mr. Mengdey, learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule for Respondent No. 1 to 3 and Mr. B.S. Patel, learned Counsel for Respondent No. 4 waives service of notice of Rule. With the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for both the sides, the matter is finally heard today.2. The short facts of the case appear to be that the Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Borsad was having the market area comprising of two revenue Talukas namely; Borsad Taluka as well as Anklav Taluka . It appears that the State Government on 23.8.2004 issued a notification for division of APMC, Borsad into two market committees namely; APMC, Borsad comprising of the market area of revenue Borsad Taluka and APMC, Anklav comprising of the market area of revenue Anklav Taluka. There is no dispute on the said aspect and it has been stated that the notification is given effect on 30.8.2004 so far as it relates to division of these two market committees are concerned. It appears that the...
Asian Food Industries Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-01-2006
Reported in: 2008(223)ELT565(Guj); (2007)2GLR1744
D.A. Mehta, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges Notification No. 19 (RE-2006)/2004-2009 dated 4-7-2006 whereby retrospective effect is given to Notification dated 27-6-2006 and Notification dated 3-7-2006 so as to be operative with effect from 22-6-2006. The following prayers are made:(A) Your Lordships be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order and/ or direction, quashing and setting aside the impugned Notification No. 19 (RE-2006) 2004-2009 dated 4-7-2006 passed by respondent No. 2 giving retrospective effect to the Notification No. 15 (RE-2006) 2004-2009 dated 27-6-2006, and No. 17 (RE-2006) 2004-2009 dated 3-7-2006 w.e.f. 22-6-2006, holding that the said Notifications are illegal, unjust, bad in law, against the provisions of settled principles of law, discriminative, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, contrary to principles of natural justice, and also contrary to the provisions of General Clauses Act, 1897, as the said Notifi...
Rupsinghbhai Punabhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-01-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ728
J.R. Vora, J.1. This Appeal is preferred against the judgment and order delivered by the Special Judge, Ahmedabad, on 21st of September, 1987, in Special Case No. 28 of 1986, convicting present appellant - accused for the offences punishable under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and also for the offence punishable under Section 5(1)(d) to read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The present appellant for both the counts was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment of one year and to pay fine of Rs. 100, in default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month. For both the counts, one sentence i.e. fine and imprisonment is awarded by the Special Judge to the appellant - accused.2 The facts giving rise to the prosecution against the appellant can briefly stated as under:One Mr. Maurya serving as P.I. ACB, Amreli, was summoned by Mr. Anilbhai Pandya, Deputy Director, ACB, Gujarat State on 18th of October, 1985 in connection with pending ACB cases. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›