Gujarat Court March 2008 Judgments
Indian Petrochemicals Corpo. Ltd. Vs. General Secretry
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-19-2008
Reported in: [2009(121)FLR792]; (2009)ILLJ873Guj
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Joshi for Nanavati Associates appearing on behalf of petitioners and learned advocate Mr. K.H. Baxi appearing on behalf of respondents.2. Both the matters are on the stage of admission.3. In Special Civil Application No. 20826 of 2006, petitioner has challenged the order passed by Industrial Tribunal, Baroda in Reference (IT) No. 92 of 2002 vide Exh. 110 dated 1st August 2006. The Industrial Tribunal, Baroda has rejected the application submitted by petitioner vide Exh.110.4. In Special Civil Application No. 20827 of 2006, petitioner has challenged similar kind of application given in different Reference (IT) No. 255 of 1998 vide Exh.67 which was rejected on the same date i.e. 1st August 2006.5. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi raised contention that petitioner is engaged in manufacturing of petrochemicals employing around 6000 permanent workmen and their services are being governed by way of periodical settlements arrived at with the recognised u...
Tag this Judgment!Ramkumar Sukhchandan Gupta Vs. O.L. of the Navjivan Mills Company Ltd. ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-18-2008
Reported in: (2008)3GLR2290
K.A. Puj, J.1. Since common issue is involved in all these Company Applications and since they are being more or less heard together, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. 2. The applicants in all these Company Applications have taken out Judge's Summons praying for quashing and setting aside notice dated 5.6.2006 issued by the Official Liquidator calling upon the applicants to vacate the premises, which are unauthorizedly occupied by them, and to hand over the vacant and peaceful possession of the premises to the Official Liquidator, failing which the Official Liquidator will have to initiate action to forcibly remove them from the premises of the Company in liquidation, with police assistance in order to proceed with the liquidation proceedings of the Company. The applicants have also prayed for the direction to restrain the respondent from disturbing the possession and use of the shop situated at Navjivan Mills premises of Mouje Village - Kalol, Taluka an...
Tag this Judgment!Rameshbhai Tank and ors. Vs. O.L. of Vijay Mills Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-18-2008
Reported in: (2008)3CompLJ516(Guj); (2008)3GLR2486; [2008]85SCL262(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. Since common issue is involved in all these Company Applications and since they are more or less heard together, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.2. Official Liquidator Report No. 55 of 2008 is a compliance report filed by the Official Liquidator pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in respect of the subject matter of all these Company Applications and hence, the same is also being disposed of by this common judgment and order. 3. In all these Company Applications, the applicants have taken out separate Judge's Summons praying for quashing and setting aside the notices issued by the Official Liquidator dated 24.05.2007 and 10.10.2007. The applicants have also prayed for the direction to the Official Liquidator to restrain him from taking possession of the rooms occupied by them and situated on land bearing Survey Nos. 410/1/B bearing Final Plot No. 46 of T.P. Scheme No. 12 of Ahmedabad. All applicants have filed their separate a...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pababhai Mayabhai Harijan and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-18-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ245; [2008(118)FLR293]; (2008)2GLR1091
H.B. Antani, J.1. This appeal, preferred under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, is directed against the judgment and award passed by the Workman Compensation Commissioner, Gandhidham, Kutch in W.C.F. No. 11 of 2006 dated 02.01.07 by which the learned Commissioner has awarded an amount of Rs. 2,24,000/- to the distraught heirs and legal representatives of deceased Dhaniben Pababhai. The learned Commissioner has further awarded interest at 12% from 09.06.98 till the date of payment, Rs. 1,12,000/- being 50% penalty, Rs. 1000/- towards obsequial expenses, and Rs. 5000/- towards costs. 2. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid award passed by the learned Commissioner, the Insurance Company, The New India Assurance Company Limited has preferred the present appeal mainly on the grounds that the Insurance policy produced in the matter makes it abundantly clear that it covers risk of only 40 workers; since the Commissioner has already discussed in the order that 66 persons had fil...
Tag this Judgment!iPCL Employees' Association and Anr. Vs. Indian Petrochemical Corporat ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-18-2008
Reported in: (2008)3GLR1856; (2009)ILLJ399Guj; [2008]84SCL133(Guj)
Mohit S. Shah, J.1. This Original Jurisdiction appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.8.2007 in Company Petition No. 93 of 2007 by which the learned Company Judge sanctioned the scheme of amalgamation of the petitioner-Company- Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'IPCL' or Sthe transferor Company) having its registered office at Baroda with Reliance Industries Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'RIL' or 'Reliance' or the Stransferee Company) having its registered office at Mumbai.2. Reliance Industries Ltd. having its registered office at Bombay filed Company Application No. 283 of 2007 before the Bombay High Court. Pursuant to the order dated 16.3.2007 in the said application, RIL held separate meetings of equity shareholders, secured creditors (including debenture holders) and unsecured creditors of RIL on 21.4.2007. The Chairman of the said meeting submitted his report before the Bombay High Court and the RIL filed Company petition No...
Tag this Judgment!Gaurangbhai Bipinbhai Pandya Vs. Bank of Baroda and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-18-2008
Reported in: AIR2008Guj141; [2010]153CompCas359(Guj); (2008)2GLR1513
Jayant Patel, J.1. Rule. Ms. Nalini S. Lodha learned Counsel waives service of notice of rule for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.2. With the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for both the sides, the matter is finally heard today.3. The short facts of the case appear to be that the petitioners in the respective petitions, who are husband and wife, had taken housing loan and as the loan was not paid, the proceedings were initiated before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, and ultimately, thereafter the proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred as to the 'Securitization Act') were initiated for disposal of the property. It appears that when the process of disposal of the property was undertaken, the petitioners had challenged the action of the Bank, by preferring writ petition and the said writ petition was dismissed, against which the L.P.A. was preferred, and the same was also dismissed being...
Tag this Judgment!iqbal Moosa Patel S/O. Mohammed Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-17-2008
Reported in: (2008)2GLR1598
R.H. Shukla, J.1. These Criminal Appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 3rd November, 2006 passed in Sessions Case No. 183 of 2001 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court, Ahmedabad, recording the conviction of the appellants-accused for the offences under Section 8(c), read with Sections 21 and 29, of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'NDPS Act') for possession and illegal smuggling and trafficking of heroin as a part of the conspiracy. The appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 2327 of 2006 is the original accused No. 1 and has been convicted and sentenced to twelve years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2 Lakhs, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two years. The appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 754 of 2007-Hemaram Chaudhary is the original accused No. 2 and he has been convicted and sentenced to twelve years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2 Lakhs, in default to...
Tag this Judgment!Vaishnodevi Enterprises Vs. Tai Chongbang Textiles Industries Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-17-2008
Reported in: [2008]145CompCas354(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, for winding up of the respondent-company on the ground that the respondent-company has failed to discharge its liabilities towards its creditors including the petitioner.2. This court has issued notice on May 4, 2007. Notice was duly served on the respondent-company. Mr. Raju K. Kothari, learned advocate appears for the respondent-company. An affidavit-in-reply is filed on behalf of the respondent-company on August 21, 2007. After considering the petition as well as the reply filed by the respondent-company and after hearing learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, this court has passed an order of admission and advertisement on September 6, 2007. It was observed by the court that in view of the statement made in the petition read with the affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent-company and more particularly the averments made at paragraphs 7, 8, 9 and 10, it ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat Vs. Mahendrasinh Prithvisinh Vaghela
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-14-2008
Reported in: (2008)3GLR1923
J.R. Vora, J.1. Both the Appeals have been preferred by the State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the common judgment and order delivered by Presiding Officer, 6th Fast Track Court, Palanpur (Mr. V.K. Pujara), on 17th of July, 2006, in Special Case No. 76 of 2005 and in Special Case No. 77 of 2005.2. It is the prosecution case that on 1st of April, 2004, at about 21-30 hours, P.W. 3-Balubhai Dhanabhai, met complainant at village Bhanpur. At that time, P.W. 2-Chandubhai Gadarbhai was also present. Complainant, P.W. 2 and P.W. 3 were talking amongst themselves. At that time, accused No. 1 Premsinh Joravarsinh Vaghela and accused No. 2-Mahendrasinh Prithvisinh Vaghela came near them and snatched a purse of P.W. 3 from the hood of motor bike of P.W. 3. Both the accused ran away from that place. Complainant, accompanying P.W. 2 and P.W. 3, chaised both the accused and caught hold of them. Complainant stated that why the purse of P.W. 3 was taken away by th...
Tag this Judgment!Narandas Chimanlal Patel (Since Deceased by L.Rs.) and ors. Vs. Swami ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-14-2008
Reported in: AIR2008Guj135
ORDERJayant Patel, J.1. The short facts of the case appear to be that the petitioners are the member of the respondent Societies residing in tenement No. 47. The Society passed a Resolution dated 26-12-1993 for expulsion of the petitioners as members on the grounds mentioned in the Resolution. On 10-1-1994, the petitioner filed Lavad Suit for declaration and perpetual injunction praying that the proceedings of the meeting dated 26-12-1993 are illegal, mala fide, void etc. and the permanent injunction was also prayed restraining the Society or its agents or servants from implementing the proceedings of the meeting dated 26-12-1993. The learned Nominee entertained the suit and passed order on 15-2-1994 below application for temporary injunction, whereby the interim injunction came to be granted restraining the Society, its members, and agents from implementing the proceedings of the meeting dated 26-12-1993. It appears that the respondent Society carried the matter in revision being Revi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »