Gujarat Court September 2007 Judgments
Divisional Manager, L.i.C. of India Vs. Shobhana Manishkumar thesia an ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-28-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR1078]; (2008)1GLR694
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. A.K. Clerk appearing on behalf of petitioners.2. In these petitions, petitioners have challenged the order passed by Central Government of Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Ahmedabad in Recovery Application Nos. 831 to 846 of 2004 (old Recovery Application Nos. 5 to 20 of 1991) dated 11th October, 2005.3. The Labour Court partly allowed the applications with a direction to the petitioners to pay the bonus amount as claimed by the respondents in their applications within a period of 60 days of receipt of this order. The respondents are not entitled for the interest and cost of Rs. 3,000/- has been awarded by the Labour Court.4. Learned Advocate Mr. A.K. Clerk appearing on behalf of petitioners submitted that, Recovery Applications filed by the respondents as per averments made in Para 1, the concerned applicants were not permanent on 31st March 1984 and one case of Smt. Shobhanaben Manishkumar Thesia who is appointed on 17th November, 198...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat and ors. Vs. Dadabhai Hathibhai Chitrasani and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-28-2007
Reported in: 2008GLH(1)1; (2008)1GLR441
C.K. Buch, J.1. By way of preferring the present Civil Application, the applicants have prayed that the delay in filing the Misc. Civil Application (Stamp) No. 301 of 2007 in Special Civil Application No. 20628 of 2005 for reviewing the order dated 11th October, 2005 passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 20628 of 2005, may be condoned on the grounds mentioned in the application in the interest of justice.2. The said substantive petition i.e., Special Civil Application No. 20628 of 2005 has been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 11th October, 2005, which is sought to be reviewed by way of captioned Misc. Civil Application for review. The said petition was preferred by the State of Gujarat and other two officers of the State serving at District Banaskantha; and it was mainly prayed that:(B) Be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or writ in the nature of mandamus or order/direction or writ in the nature of appropriate writ and be pleased to call for the records an...
Tag this Judgment!Swastik Textile Engineers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Virjibhai Mavjibhai Rathod and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-27-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR1002]; (2008)1GLR670; (2008)IILLJ533Guj
R.M. Doshit, J.1. This is the petition preferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by M/s. Swastik Textile Engineers Private Limited, an employer within the meaning of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act'), against the order dated 21st April, 1999 made by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (II)(hereinafter referred to as, 'the Commissioner') under Paragraph 26B of the Employees' Provident Funds Scheme, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Scheme').2. The dispute is in connection with the liability of the petitioner to make provident fund contribution in respect of the amount of backwages paid to the respondent No. 1 - workman in compliance with the order passed by the Labour Court.3. The petitioner had terminated the service of the workman on 7th June, 1982. In ensuing litigation, by award published on 27th September, 1991, the petitioner was directed to reinstate the workman in servic...
Tag this Judgment!Shailesh Laljibhai and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-26-2007
Reported in: II(2008)DMC849; (2008)2GLR1522
C.K. Buch, J.1. The appellants-orig. accused (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellants') have preferred present appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 21st February, 2006 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, 11th Fast Track Court, Gondal and learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot in Sessions Case No. 8 of 2004, whereby the learned trial Judge has held the appellants guilty for the charge of offence punishable under Section 498A read with Section 114, and also under Section 306 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant No. 1 is imposed simple imprisonment for 3 years and a fine of Rs. 3000/- for the offence punishable under Section 498A read with Section 114 and to undergo simple imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- for the offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code. The indefault punishment i.e. for non-...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendrasinh V. Chauhan Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-26-2007
Reported in: (2008)1GLR634
S.R. Brahmbhatt, J.1. The petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has challenged inter alia the order of District Development Officer passed on 20-9-1984 suspending Resolution No. 40 dated 17-7-1984 passed by the then Lunawada Nagar Panchayat (now Lunawada Borough) promoting and appointing the petitioner from the post of Accountant to the post of Secretary w.e.f. 17-7-1984 on retirement of the then Secretary on his attaining the age of superannuation; on the ground that the Resolution No. 40 passed by Lunawada Nagar Panchayat was not in consonance with the instructions of the State contained in communication dated 19-3-1983. The Resolution was suspended under Section 294 of the Gujarat Panchayat Act, 1961.2. The facts in brief deserve to be set out as under:The petitioner who was an employee of Lunawada Nagar Panchayat had originally been appointed as Naka Karkoon on 6-5-1957. Thereafter, he was promoted as Accountant in 1972. Petitioner was given charge of the post o...
Tag this Judgment!Food Corporation of India and ors. Vs. Harish Transport Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: (2008)1GLR92
K.M. Mehta, J.1. The Food Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as F.C.I.)-appellant-original defendant has filed this appeal under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 against the judgment and award dated 30-12-1985 passed by the Civil Judge (S.D.), Kutch at Bhuj in Original Civil Suit No. 64 of 1979 filed by M/s. Harish Transport Corporation-original plaintiff along with Misc. Civil Application No. 36 of 1985 and Misc. Civil Application No. 37 of 1985. By the impugned judgment, the learned Judge has disposed of the civil suit and as regards Misc. Civil Application No. 36 of 1985, the learned Judge has observed that the application raising the objection for validity of the award must fail, and therefore, the same is dismissed. As regards Misc. Civil Application No. 37 of 1985, the learned Judge has observed that the said application raising the objection for demanding fees and costs of arbitration by the Arbitrator must fail, and therefore, the same is dismissed. The learne...
Tag this Judgment!Kachhiya Patidar Samaj Vs. Joint Charity Commissioner and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: (2008)1GLR232
D.A. Mehta, J.1. This petition has been filed by a Charitable Trust seeking a writ to quash and set aside order dated 22-1-2007 made by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Surat in Application No. 36/30 of 2005 and order dated 6-8-2007 made by Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in Appeal TEN : AS No. 1 of 2007 where under the order made by the Joint Charity Commissioner has been confirmed by the Tribunal.2. The petitioner-Trust is in possession of land bearing City Survey Nos. 2180 and 2181 at Bardoli on and from 3-6-1996. It is also an accepted fact that on the date of purchase of the said land, namely, 3-6-1996, a building was already in existence on the said land. It is further stated by the petitioner-Trust that in 2005 there was oral discussion with local land developer Mr. Hemant Joshi of M/s. Soham Developers for development of land belonging to the petitioner-Trust. In Paragraph No. 5.6 of the petition, it is stated that an oral scheme was formulated with the five conditions stated therein:5...
Tag this Judgment!Vinodbhai Jagjivan Patadiya Vs. Narayanbhai Jagjivan Patadiya and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-24-2007
Reported in: (2008)1GLR590
ORDERAppeal No. 387 of 1994 is allowed. The order of the learned nominee in Restoration Application No. 176 of 1993 dated 6-12-1994 is confirmed. However, the judgment and award of the learned nominee in Lavad Case No. 4 of 1982 dated 13-8-1993 and 14-9-1993 are quashed and set aside for want of jurisdiction under Section 93. However, the status quo for the disputed property be maintained by the appellant, respondent No. 2 i.e. the society and respondent No. 1 for one month for approaching Hon'ble High Court. No order as to cost.Given and pronounced on : 21-2-2006. Sd/- Sd/-(V.R. Jadav) (R.M. Thakker)President Member5. The present petition has been filed with the limited grievance qua the aforesaid observation made by the Tribunal. The learned Advocate for the petitioner, during course of hearing, has after setting out the historical facts assailed the impugned order of Tribunal on the ground that once the Tribunal had confirmed the order made by the Board of Nominees the Tribunal coul...
Tag this Judgment!Jindal Power Ltd. and anr. Vs. Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-24-2007
Reported in: (2008)1GLR273
M.S. Shah, J.1. These petitions filed by M/s. Jindal Power Ltd. and P.T.C. India Limited challenge the communications dated 12-1-2007 of Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the first respondent' or 'the Corporation') cancelling the Letters of Intent which were awarded to the petitioners on 8-12-2006 for entering into Power Purchase Agreements.2. Facts:2.1 M/s. Jindal Power Ltd. (petitioner in Spl. C.A. No. 2186 of 2007) is engaged in the business of the generation and sale of electricity. P.T.C. India Ltd. (formerly known as Power Trading Corporation of India Ltd. - petitioner in Spl. C.A. No. 3514 of 2007) is a Government of India initiated Public Private Partnership, whose primary focus is to develop a commercially vibrant power market in the country.2.2 The first respondent-Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. (Gujarat Energy Development Corporation Ltd.) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and is a s...
Tag this Judgment!H.T. Power Structure P. Ltd. and ors. Vs. R.P. Sharma and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-21-2007
Reported in: (2008)218CTR(Guj)170; [2008]299ITR363(Guj)
M.R. Shah, J.1. As common question of law and facts arise in these petitions, they are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.2. Special Criminal Application No. 1273 of 1992 is filed by the petitioners, original accused, for an appropriate order quashing and setting aside the proceedings launched by the Income-tax Department by way of Criminal Case No. 251/92 pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad, and also to quash and set aside the order passed by the learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate dated March 27, 1992, in issuing the summons upon the petitioners in the said criminal case.3. Special Criminal Application No. 1274 of 1992 has been filed by the petitioners, original accused, for an appropriate order quashing and setting aside the proceedings launched by the Income-tax Department by way of Criminal Case No. 252/92 pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad. It is also further prayed to quash and set aside ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »