Gujarat Court October 2008 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.
Kantilal Gordhandas Lalakiya Vs. Ramniklal Laxmichan Khimasiya and 2 o ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-17-2008
Reported in: 2010ACJ100; (2009)1GLR319
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Premal S. Rachh for M/s. Thakkar Associates for appellant employer, learned Advocate Mr. UT Mishra for respondents Nos. 1, 2 and learned Advocate Mr. Barot for learned Advocate Ms. Avani S. Mehta for respondent No. 3.2. Through this appeal, appellant has challenged judgment rendered by learned Ex Officio Commissioner for Workmen Compensation Jamnagar in WC (Fatal) Case No. 37 of 2000 Exh. 70 dated 16.5.2006 wherein Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation has exonerated respondent No. 3 insurance company while deciding issue No. 5A and 5B and ordered that entire amount of compensation with penalty and interest is to be paid by employer as directed by Commissioner.3. While admitting this appeal, this Court passed following order on 23rd April, 2007:Ms. Pahwa, learned advocate appearing for the appellant has submitted that initially the appellant has deposited an amount of Rs. 2,18,470/- by Demand Draft dated 13.4.2007 and subsequently, a furth...
Jabal C. Lashkari Vs. O.L. of Prasad Mills Limited and 3 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-17-2008
Reported in: (2009)1GLR158
ORDER43. In view of the statement of Mr RM Desai, learned Counsel for the secured creditor that the arrears of rent, if any, remaining unpaid by the company in liquidation shall be paid by the secured creditor, we direct that within one month from today, the Official Liquidator shall supply to the secured creditor the particulars of the rent for the demised land for the period upto 31st October 2008, remaining unpaid so far, and the secured creditor -State Bank of India shall deposit the amount with the Official Liquidator within one month thereafter. It will be open to the lessors to withdraw such amount.44. In the result, subject to the above directions and subject to further directions, which are being given separately regarding the advertisement for assignment of leasehold rights of the company in liquidation, the appeals are dismissed. The interim stay granted during pendency of the appeals against transfer or assignment of leasehold rights of the company in liquidation is hereby ...
Kiritchnadra Dhirendrai Desai and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-17-2008
Reported in: (2009)1GLR223
K.S. Radhakrishnan, C.J.1. Una Nagar Panchayat, in exercise of powers conferred on it under Section 22(1) of the Bombay Town Planning Act, 1954 (for brevity 'the Act') passed Resolution No. 235 dated 10th December, 1970, declaring its intention to make Town Planning Scheme (No. 2), in respect of lands bearing revenue Survey Nos. 537/1, 537/2, 537/3, 537/4 along with other lands. The relevant records were forwarded to the State Government. Copy of the plan and the details thereof were also made available and open for public inspection at Head Office of the local authority, as provided under Section 22(4) of the Act. Later after completing necessary formalities, Nagar Panchayat, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 23 of the Act, finalised draft Town Planning Scheme No. 2, and it was accordingly published in the Gujarat Government Gazette, Part-II on 1st June, 1972. Government, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 23 of the Act sanctioned the draft Town Planning Scheme,...
Ashish Metal Rolling Mills (Presently Known as Ferromet) Vs. Commissio ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-16-2008
Reported in: 2009(234)ELT201(Guj)
D.A. Mehta, J.1. The appellant has proposed the following two questions:(I) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal was in error in holding that both the lower authorities had rejected the refund claim filed by the appellant on the ground that the respondent had failed to discharge the burden as regards payment of duty having not been passed on to others?(II) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in allowing Appeal No. E/2552/02-MUM filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad-1?2. Heard learned advocates for both the sides. The appeal requires to be admitted on the following substantial question of law:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal could have passed the order on 5.1.2007 when, admittedly, the hearing had taken place on 7.6.2004 without according...
Dosanbu N. Mahudawalla Wd/O N.i. Mahudawalla and 3 ors. Vs. Gulamsabbi ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-16-2008
Reported in: (2009)1GLR216
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Trilok J. Patel for appellants original claimants and learned Advocate Mr. SS Gade for respondent No. 3.2. Through this appeal, appellants original claimants have challenged judgment and award made by Claims Tribunal (Auxi.) at Baroda in MACP No. 252 of 1979 dated 10.3.1981 wherein claims tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 1,21,670.00 in favour of claimants. In this appeal, while challenging said award, claimants are praying for enhancing it by Rs. 1,00,000.00 and have paid court fees on Rs. 1,00,000.00 in this appeal.3. Learned Advocate Mr. Patel for appellants has submitted that claims tribunal has committed gross error while considering income of deceased from two sources, one from M/s. Kaduji & Co. and another from M/s. Mahudawala & Co.. He submitted that yearly income from both the partnership firm received by deceased as per assessment order of 1973 and 1974 comes to Rs. 7898.00 in Mahudawala and Co. and Rs. 18499.00 in M/s. Kadu...
State of Gujarat Vs. Hiteshkumar Madhusudan Adhvaryu
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-16-2008
Reported in: (2009)1GLR498
J.R. Vora, J.1. Both the above matters have arisen from the same Judgment and Order delivered by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 3, Bharuch, on 15.12.2007, in Sessions Case No. 82 of 2007. Appellant of Criminal Appeal No. 37 of 2008 Hiteshkumar Madhusudan Adhvaryu was charged for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code and vide the impugned judgment and order, the accused was found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Trial Judge awarded death penalty to the accused for the offences punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code while he was sentenced to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment of six months for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. No separate sentence was awarded for the offence punishable under Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Th...
Central Bank of India Vs. Coast West Ferro Alloys and 7 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-14-2008
Reported in: (2009)1GLR59
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Nagesh C. Sood appearing on behalf of appellant and learned advocate Ms. Sejal K. Mandavia appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 7 on caveat.2. The appellant Central Bank of India has filed present appeal challenging the order passed by Civil Court in Special Civil Suit No. 153 of 2000 vide Exh.44 dated 22nd March 2007. The Civil Court has dismissed the suit considering the bar of Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies Act (hereinafter referred to as 'SICA') read with Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC').3. Learned advocate Mr. Sood submitted that Special Civil Suit is filed by appellant against respondents, where, contention raised by respondent vide Exh.44 that respondent being a sick unit declared by Board of Industrial Finance and Reconstruction (hereinafter referred to as 'BIFR'), therefore, under Section 22(1) of SICA, present suit is not to be maintainable against respondents.4....
Employees' State Insurance Corporation Vs. Park Fishnet Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-14-2008
Reported in: [2008(119)FLR1115]; (2009)ILLJ779Guj
ORDERH.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Sachin D. Vasavada for appellant Employees State Insurance Corporation, learned advocate Mr. Prabhakar Upadhyay for respondent.2. In this appeal, notice was issued by this Court on August 8,2008 in view of production of Exhibit 23 on record. In this appeal, appellant corporation has challenged order passed by ESI Court, Ahmedabad in ESI Application No. 35 of 2002 dated May 30,2008 wherein ESI Court has allowed application against Corporation while declaring that notice issued by appellant corporation to respondent establishment dated November 6,2001 is unjust, illegal and contrary to provisions of law and it was also declared that the respondent establishment has made contribution as per law with effect from period on which Act become applicable and for the: period prior to that, no contribution is payable by it.3. Learned advocate Mr. Vasavada for appellant raised contention that ESI Act is made applicable on March 1, 2001 while issuin...
In Re: Sumilon Plastic P. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-14-2008
Reported in: [2009]147CompCas189(Guj); [2010]98SCL163(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. These are the petitions filed by the petitioner-companies for sanction of a scheme of amalgamation of the three transferor companies, viz., Sumilon Plastic P. Ltd., Sumilon Tex P. Ltd. and Shree Kapil Yarn Ltd., with Sumilon Industries Ltd., the transferee company under Section 391 read with Section 394 of the Companies Act, 1956.Vide the respective orders dated April 1, 2008, passed in Company Applications Nos. 237 and 238 of 2008, meetings of the equity shareholders, secured creditors and unsecured creditors were dispensed with in case of two transferor companies in view of the written consent letters placed on record. Similarly, vide said order passed in Company Application No. 239 of 2008, the meetings of the equity shareholders and unsecured creditors were dispensed with in view of the written consent letters placed on record.2. There were no secured creditors of the said transferor company on the date of filing the application. Similarly, vide said order passed for...
In Re: Surabhi Chemicals and Investments Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-14-2008
Reported in: [2009]149CompCas278(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. These are the petitions filed by the petitioner-companies for sanction of amalgamation of M/s. Paami Textiles and Investments Ltd., transferor company and M/s. Surabhi Chemicals and Investments Ltd., transferee company under Section 391 read with Section 394 of the Companies Act, 1956.2. The transferor company is a subsidiary company of the transferee company and belongs to same group of management. Both the companies are investment companies and at present engaged in investment activities. The amalgamation is proposed for synergic advantages. The petitions give details of the advantages that would flow by virtue of the amalgamation of these companies.3. The proposed scheme was approved by the equity shareholders of the transferor company through the consent letters placed on record along with application. The creditors of the transferor company have also given their consent and their consent letters were placed on record along with the application and, therefore, the me...