Gujarat Court January 2009 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.
In Re: Essar Shipping Ports and Logistics Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-16-2009
Reported in: [2009]149CompCas417(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. The petitioner is the transferee company and has filed the present petition before this Court to obtain the sanction of this Court to a scheme of amalgamation to be made between India Shipping and Essar Sisco Shipping Management Co. Ltd. ('transferor companies') and Essar Shipping and Ports Logistics Ltd. ('the petitioner') or the transferee company.2. The petitioner-company was originally incorporated on April 5, 1975, under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, as Karnataka Shipping Corporation Ltd., with Registrar of Companies, Karnataka. The name of the said company was changed to Essar Shipping Ltd., on September 5, 1994. Later on March 24, 2008, the name of the said company was changed to its present name, i.e., Essar Shipping and Ports Logistics Ltd. The registered office of the company has been shifted from the State of Karnataka to the State of Gujarat vide fresh certificate of registration dated August 21, 2008. The registered office of the petitioner is s...
Premjibhai Bachubhai Khasiya Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-16-2009
Reported in: (2009)2GLR1268
A.L. Dave, J.1. The appellant came to be tried by Sessions Court, Bhavnagar for offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 read with Section 114, Section 376 read with Section 114 and Section 506(2) read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code ('I.P.C.', for short) along with co-accused Arvindbhai Anandbhai Khasiya in Sessions Case No. 123 of 2007. At the end of the trial, co-accused Arvindbhai Anandbhai Khasiya came to be acquitted by the Sessions Court, and the present appellant came to be convicted for offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 and 506(2), all read with Section 114 of the I.P.C. and sentenced as under:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Sections Punishment-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Under Section 363 read with R.I. for two years and fine of Rs. 1,000/-Section 114 of the I.P.C. in default R.I. for one month.Under Section 366 read with R.I. for three years and fine o...
Gujarat Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-15-2009
Reported in: (2009)1GLR816
Jayant Patel, J.1. The short facts of the case appear to be that the petitioner is a financial institution governed by the provisions of State Financial Corporations Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The respondent No. 6 had taken loan from the petitioner as well as from the other financial institutions, who are respondents No. 3, 4, and 5. As per the petitioner, respondent No. 6 made default in paying the loan amount to the petitioner as well as to the other financial institutions. Simultaneously there were also arrears of taxes of the State Government of luxury tax, etc. Since statutory taxes were recoverable by procedure as provided under the Bombay Land Revenue Code (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code'), the City Deputy Collector issued a notification dated 30th September, 2002 inviting offers from the public at large for disposal of the properties of respondent No. 6. In the very notification some details were mentioned for the claim of the petitioner as well as one Ch...
Kiritchandra Chinubhai Pandya Vs. Central Bank of India and 2 ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-13-2009
Reported in: (2009)IIILLJ408Guj
ORDERK.S. Jhaveri, J.1. The petitioner has challenged order dated October 19, 2005 and March 4, 2008 passed by the Disciplinary authority as well as the appellate authority respectively and to declare that the departmental proceedings initiated by the respondent bank against the petitioner is illegal and unjust.2. The brief facts are as under:3. The petitioner was appointed as a part time Safai Karmachari with the respondent bank at Gulbaitekra Branch of Central Bank of India from 1982. According to the petitioner, since he had fallen sick, he did not attend the duties. Therefore in the year the respondent issued a chargesheet and thereafter imposed punishment of stoppage of one increment with future effect. Thereafter again the petitioner did not attend duties and therefore another chargesheet was issued on May 8, 2004 for the misconduct of remaining absence for 216 days from service' Departmental proceedings were initiated and Inquiry Report was submitted on August 9, 2005. Ultimatel...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Monghiben Kodarbhai Parmar
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-12-2009
Reported in: 2010ACJ429; AIR2009Guj72; (2009)1GLR765
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. SB Parikh for learned Advocate Mr. Rajni H. Mehta for appellant, learned senior advocate Mr. YS Lakhani for respondent No. 6 Hirabhai Govabhai Patel, learned Advocate Mr. JV Japee for respondents claimants and learned Advocate Mr. KK Nair for respondent No. 9. Notice issued by this Court to respondent No. 5, 7 and 8 is served on them but they have not appeared before this Court either in person or through an advocate. In First Appeal No. 4169 of 1998 also, though respondents No. 2, 4 and 5 have been served with the notice issued by this court, they have not appeared before this Court either in person or through an advocate.2. These appeals have been filed by appellant National Insurance Co. Ltd. challenging common award made by MACT Sabarkantha District Himatnagar Exh. 88 in Claim Petition No. 431 of 1989 and Claim Petition No. 535 of 1989 dated 30.05.1998.3. Short question arising for consideration of this court in these appeals is, whether...
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Vs. O.L. of Aps Star Ind. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-12-2009
Reported in: (2009)2GLR1158
D.A. Mehta, J.1 This group of appeals has been preferred challenging the judgment and order dated 09.07.2007 of the learned Single Judge (hereinafter referred to as 'the Company Court') dismissing Company Application No. 489 of 2006 filed by the appellant of Appeal No. 156 of 2007, and similar other matters.2. It is an accepted position that the facts stated in Appeal No. 156 of 2007 are similar to those involved in other appeals and the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties have treated O.J. Appeal No. 156 of 2007 as the principal appeal. Hence, hereinafter reference to the facts shall be from the record of O.J. Appeal No. 156 of 2007, unless specifically mentioned otherwise. The appellant has formulated the following 19 questions of law, stated to be arising out of the judgment of the Company Court:Questions of Law: (i) Whether the Company Court has erred in adopting a completely erroneous procedure in the conduct of this application, particularly in impleading the C...
Indian Bank Vs. Alltune Electronics Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-12-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Guj121
Jayant Patel, J.1. The short facts of the case appear to be that the petitioner Bank preferred O.A. No. 107 of 1995 against the respondent for recovery of the amount of Rs. 93,10,429.33 with the running interest until realisation. The Tribunal tried the O.A. And ultimately found that in the Books of Accounts of the Bank the amount shown outstanding was only Rs. 47,79,906.33 and as the interest was not charged after 1.7.1992 to 25.9.1995, the Bank was not entitled to claim interest during the said period. Therefore, the Tribunal decreed the application to the extent of Rs. 47,79,906.33 with the interest at the rate of 21.75% per annum for the period from 25.5.1995 i.e. the date of the application till the realisation of the amount and the cost. The petitioner Bank carried the matter in appeal before DRAT in Appeal No. 182 of 1997. The appellate Bench fund that the Tribunal Committed error in not awarding the interest as per the contractual rate of interest of 21.75% perannum for the per...
O.L. of Piramal Financial Services Ltd. Vs. Decimal Systems Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-12-2009
Reported in: [2009]150CompCas546(Guj); [2009]91SCL31(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. The Official Liquidator of Piramal Financial Services Ltd., (PFSL) has filed Company Application No. 172 of 2008 praying for the direction to the respondent, namely, Decimal Systems Pvt. Ltd. and Ms. Shefali Doshi to pay to the Liquidator by way of mesne profit and/or compensation calculated at the rate of Rs. 30/- per sq.ft. for office premises and at the rate of Rs. 10/- per sq.ft. for parking space per month from 1.9.1999 till 29.5.2007 when vacant and peaceful possession was handedover to the Liquidator.2. The Company Application No. 582 of 2008 is filed by Ms. Shefali Doshi through her power of attorney holder - Mr. D.D. Mehta, for declaration that the transaction between the applicant and the Company - Piramal Financial Services Ltd., reflected in the Memorandum of Understanding dated 1.9.1999 is not void against the Liquidator and also to declare that the same is valid within the meaning of Sections 531/531-A of the Companies Act, 1956.3. Since both these Applicat...
indoco Remedies Ltd. Vs. O.L. of Kay Packaging P. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-12-2009
Reported in: [2009]150CompCas770(Guj); [2009]96SCL384(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. The applicant, Indoco Remedies Ltd., has taken out this judge's summons seeking an order against the official liquidator restraining him from interfering with the possession of the property situated at plot No. A 28/1, MIDC Patalganga Industrial Area, Maharashtra. The applicant has also prayed for a declaration that the company in liquidation has no right, title and interest in the aforesaid property and that the same is not the assets of the company in liquidation.2. An affidavit is filed by one Jagdish Babu Salian in support of the judge's summons. Mr. Deven Parikh, learned advocate appearing for the applicant company submitted that the land ad measuring 2650 sq.mtrs. situated at plot No. A 28/1 at MIDC Patalganga Industrial Area was in the possession of Kay Packaging P. Ltd. By an agreement to lease dated October 9, 1984, Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (MIDC) inter alia agreed to give on lease to Kay Packaging P. Ltd., a plot of land bearing plot No. A...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›