Gujarat Court March 2008 Judgments
Chandrakant Meghjibhai Daki Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-31-2008
Reported in: (2008)2GLR1146
Z.K. Saiyed, J.1. Rule. Learned APP Mr. K.T. Dave, waives service of Rule on behalf of the Respondent State in both the matters.2. Both the petitioners have filed the said application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., who have been detained in judicial custody since July, 2007, who are in custody in connection with the offence registered at CR No. I-454 of 2006 with Ellisbridge Police Station, Ahmedabad. The offences have been alleged against both the petitioners and some other accused of said C.R. No. I-454/2006 are under Section 147, 148, 149, 302 read with Section 34 as well as read with Section 120B of IPC and Section 135(1) of Bombay Police Act. From the FIR and other material collected by the Investigating Officer and from the charge-sheet, facts of the said matter are as under:On 15/06/2006, the deceased Pankajbhai Trivedi who had been to Ellisbridge Gymkhana, when came out from Ellis-bridge Gymkhana at about 8.15 pm and went near parking of Ellis-bridge Gymkhana, Ahmedabad city, wa...
Tag this Judgment!Sarpanch-paddhar Gram Panchayat Vs. Collector and 3 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-31-2008
Reported in: (2008)2GLR1349
Abhilasha Kumari, J.1. As common issues are involved in these two petitions, the subject matters of which are also similar, both these petitions are being heard and decided by a common judgment.2. In Special Civil Application No. 20602 of 2007 the orders dated 16.7.2007 (Annexure: H, I and J) issued by respondent No. 1 ' Collector in favour of respondent No. 2, 3 and 4, in connection with granting land of Survey No. 741 Paiki situated in sim of Paddar village of Taluka Bhuj-Kachchh, have been challenged, whereas in Special Civil Application No. 13413 of 2007, the orders dated 5.6.2004, in connection with granting land of Survey No. 741 Paiki situated in sim of Paddhar village of Taluka Bhuj-Kachchh, (Annexure:B, C and D) issued by Respondent No. 1-Collector in favour of Respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4, are impugned.3. Since the parties and the lis are the same in each petition, the facts, as found in Special Civil Application No. 20602 of 2007 only, are being adverted to.4. During the pende...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Zydus Bsv Research and Devlopment P. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-31-2008
Reported in: [2008]144CompCas450(Guj); [2010]98SCL36(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. The present company petition is filed for sanctioning the arrangement embodied in the scheme of amalgamation of Zydus BSV Research and Development P. Ltd. (transferor company) with Zydus BSV Pharma P. Ltd. (transferee company) whereby the undertaking of the transferor company (as defined in the scheme) shall stand transferred to and vested in the transferee company on the terms and conditions as stated in the scheme of amalgamation and whereby all the assets and liabilities of the transferor company would be transferred to the transferee company on the terms and conditions, as stated in the scheme of amalgamation. I have heard Mr. Sandeep Singhi, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner. I have considered the contents of the petition and the totality reflected from the annexures annexed with the petition.2. Earlier, by order dated December 26, 2007, in Company Application No. 572 of 2007 preferred by the petitioner-company, i.e., the transferor company for sanctioni...
Tag this Judgment!O.L. of Commercial Ahmedabad Mills Ltd. Vs. Manager, State Bank of Ind ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-28-2008
Reported in: [2009]147CompCas243(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J. 1. The Official Liquidator has filed this report as well as Company Application and since common issue is involved in both the matters, the same are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.2. In OLR No. 12 of 2006, the Official Liquidator has prayed for ratification of his action in impleading the Secretary, Government of Gujarat, Industries and Mines Department, Gandhinagar as party - respondent in the present report. He has also prayed for confirmation of sale of land admeasuring approximately 27,741 Sq. Mts. situated at Survey Nos. 39 & 41, Town Planning Scheme No. 14, Final Plot No. 24 of Dariapur - Kazipur, Ahmedabad, except records of the Company in liquidation, in favour of Shri Nilesh Jhalani, Shriram Bhavan, Goshala Road, Ratlam, M.P. for Rs. 5.55 Crores on the terms and conditions specified in the tender document produced at Annexure F to his report. He has also prayed for ratification of his action of making payment to the Adve...
Tag this Judgment!Parbatbhai Manshibhai Vanariyamunicipal Councilor and Dy. Vs. P.V. Tri ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-28-2008
Reported in: AIR2008Guj151
C.K. Buch, J. 1. By way of filing present petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 25th January 2007 passed by the respondent No. 1 in the capacity of a designated authority under Section 6 of the Gujarat Provision for Disqualification of Members of Local Authorities for Defection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and has prayed for issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction, invoking jurisdiction vested in the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. By way of the order impugned in the petition, the respondent No. 1 under Section 8 of the Act has declared that the petitioner is disqualified from continuing as a Municipal Councellor of Jamkhambhalia Municipality, District Jamnagar. 2. The say of the petitioner is that he is the duly elected member of Jamkhambhalia Municipality (hereinafter referred to as 'the Municipality') and he is the Councillor of the Municipality after elections conducted in the year 2005. The strength of the member...
Tag this Judgment!Jalaram Virpur Smruti Trust Vs. Jt. Charity Commissioner
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-2008
Reported in: (2008)3GLR2738
Jayant Patel, J.1. The short facts of the case appear to be that the petitioner is registered trust, which came to be formed on account of the trust deed dated 17.3.1961, and it is registered vide registration No. A/2132 at Rajkot. As per the petitioner, the purpose and the object of the trust is to provide facility to the pilgrims, who visit Virpur to offer their prayers to Shri Jalarambapa, while on the way of Somnath, Drawka etc. As per the petitioner, the trust is running guest house, and for maintenance of the guest house, it is incurring expenses like electricity, bedding and other expenses, and the amount/charge is being collected for maintenance of such expenses on token basis from the visitors/pilgrims. As per the petitioner running of guest house is a business activity, which would fall in the category of Rule 32 (4) of the Bombay Public Trust (Gujarat) Rules 1961 (hereinafter referred as to the 'Rules'). It appears that demand notice was issued for recovery of the contributi...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Vivekanand Vikas Mandal Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-2008
Reported in: (2008)3GLR2170
Jayant Patel, J. 1. Rule. Mr.Shukla, learned AGP waives notice of Rule for respondents Nos. 1 & 2. With the consent of the learned advocates appearing for both the side, the matter is finally heard today.2. The only question required to be considered in the present petition is that whether the Government could retain the administration of the school exceeding the period of 5 years or not?3. The short facts which may have the relevance for the purpose of deciding the petition are as under.4. The petitioner is a registered Trust and was running a school in the name of K.R. Bhanderi Vidhyalaya. It appears that certain irregularities were found, whereas, as per the petitioner, the DEO wanted to bring about illegal pressure for extraneous consideration. 5. But as it may, it is an admitted position that on 15.10.2001, the State Government passed the order for taking over the management of the Trust under Section 33 of the Gujarat Secondary Education Act, 1972 (hereinafter 'the Act' for short...
Tag this Judgment!Ptc India Limited Formerly Power Trading Co. Vs. Gujarat Urja Vikas Ni ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-2008
Reported in: (2008)2GLR1185
ORDER47. In view of the above discussion, the following order is passed:(i) The petition is allowed. The impugned decision of the respondent as contained in the respondent's letters dated 18.12.2007, 2.2.2008, 12.2.2008 and 14.3.2008 is quashed and set aside. The respondent is directed to enter into Power Purchase Agreement with the petitioner for 440 MW of power under the terms and conditions of bid No. 1 for supplying power at the levelised tariff of Rs. 2.89 per unit. The petitioner's offer to supply 190 MW of power from Chitrapur Coal and Power Ltd. (now called Corporate Power Ltd) and also additional 250 MW of power from the same source is held to be not contrary to the RFQ and the RFP and the petitioner shall accordingly be permitted to supply 440 MW of power from Corporate Power Ltd. (formerly Chitrapur Coal and Power Ltd.).(ii) Within one week from the date of receipt of this judgment, the petitioner shall resubmit the documents earlier supplied to the respondent with their let...
Tag this Judgment!Comed Laboratories Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-2008
Reported in: (2008)217CTR(Guj)262
ORDERM.S. Shah, J.1. Mr. R.K. Patel, learned advocate for the petitioner invites our attention to the order dt. 18th Dec., 2007 in Civil Misc. No. 10116 of 2007 and connected matters Vatika Farms (P) Ltd. v. Union of India reported at (2008) 216 CTR (Del) 25-Ed. and to several orders passed by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in similar matters (e.g. order dt. 17th March, 2008 in Writ Petn. No. 597 of 2008-First Fidelity Homes Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors.2. Rule. Notice as to interim relief returnable on 5th May, 2008. In the meantime, the Settlement Commission shall not consider the settlement application filed by the petitioner as having abated under Section 245HA of the IT Act, 1961 for want of compliance with Section 245D(4A) as amended by the Finance Act, 2007.Notice to the learned Attorney General returnable on 5th May, 2008.Direct service is permitted on respondent No. 2....
Tag this Judgment!Parents Association for the Medical/Dental Students and 198 ors. Vs. J ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-24-2008
Reported in: (2008)2GLR1324
Jayant Patel, J.1. As in all the petitions, common question arise for consideration, they are being considered by this common Judgement. 2. Leave to delete Sardar Patel University as party respondents since in any case, the presence of the University may not be required for deciding the controversy raised in the present petitions.3. I have heard Mr.Yagnik, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Mr.Sunit Shah, for respondent No. 1, Mr.Dave for respondents Nos. 2 & 3 and Mrs.Nanavati for respondent No. 6 for final disposal.The short facts of the case appears to be that the petitioners who are students of Pramukhswami Medical College, respondent No. 2 herein, being run by respondent No. 3, have approached to this Court challenging the action of the respondent No. 1 Committee for fixation of the fee structure for the course of MBBS.4. It appears that for the academic year of 2003-2004 to 2005-2006, initially, the fee approved by the Fees Committee was of Rs. 1.45 Lakhs. The respondent Nos. 2...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »