Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: explosives act 1884 section 4 definitions Sorted by: old Court: gujarat Page 8 of about 4,375 results (0.041 seconds)

Thakore Dharmabhai Mohanji Vs. Sureshkumar Bhubhatlal Soni

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : 2009ACJ518; (2008)1GLR835

..... in the case of shivaji dayanu patil v. vatschala uttam more : [1991]3scr26a this court while pronouncing on the interpretation of section 92a of the motor vehicles act, 1939 held as follows (para 12 of air ): section 92-a was in the nature of a beneficial legislation enacted with a view to confer the benefit of expeditious payment of a ..... the enactment in preference to a construction which tends to defeat that purpose. 17. in that case in regard to the contention of proximity between the accident and the explosion that took place this court held: this would show that as compared to the expression 'caused by', the expression 'arising out of' has a wider connotation. the ..... the motor vehicle but the said connection need not be direct and immediate. this construction of the expression 'arising out of the use of a motor vehicle' in sec. 92-a enlarges the field of protection made available to the victims of an accident and is in consonance with the beneficial object underlying the enactment. 7. in .....

Vithalbhai D. Pandya Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and 2 ors.

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : 2008CriLJ1842

..... conspiracy to attempt to murder of shri jagdish tiwari allegedly disclosed a larger conspiracy to strike terror amongst the people or any section of people in gujarat by using bombs or explosive substances or firearms as retaliation to the indiscriminate murders and atrocities caused on the innocent muslims in gujarat, the provisions of prevention ..... .i., bapunagar police station being fir - 1st c.r. no. 101/2003 for the offences punishable under sections 307, 34 of the indian penal code and section 25(1)(a)(b) of the arms act. subsequently, with the consent accorded by the state government vide notification dated 28.04.2003 and government of india ..... of terrorism act, 2002 (for short 'pota') was invoked in the case and on 11.06.2003 an intimation was given to the concerned court for adding sections of pota in the existing sections .....

The Commissioner of Customs Vs. Senor Metals Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : 2009(236)ELT445(Guj)

..... thereof may entail an importer to undergo 100% inspection of the entire consignment. that would not tantamount to improper import of goods as required by section 111 of the act.11. the view that the court has taken, has already been taken by another bench of this court in the case of commissioner of customs ..... carried by the consignment being subjected to inspection. this becomes clear when one finds that the adjudicating authority has undertaken such an inspection and recorded that no explosive and war materials have been noticed as extracted hereinbefore.9. thus, assuming there is any violation of the conditions prescribed by the hand book of procedures, ..... -5 to the effect that:[a] the consignment does not contain any type of arms, ammunition, mines, shells, cartridges, radio active contaminated or any other explosive material in any form either used or otherwise.[b] the imported item(s) is actually a metallic waste/scrap/seconds/defective as per the internationally accepted parameters .....

Ultratech Cement Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : 2009[13]STR493

..... the cenvat credit rules, 2002. the petitioner was issued with show cause notice proposing to deny and recover credit of rs. 11,38,719/- under section 11a of the central excise act, 1944 availed on the explosives used in mines. the show cause notice also proposed to impose penalty on the petitioner under rule 13(1) of the cenvat credit rules, 2002 and ..... proposed to recover interest from the petitioner under rules 12 of the cenvat credit rules, 2002 read with section 11ab of the central excise act, 1944. the petitioner .....

National Insurance Company Vs. Gitaben Saitansinh Rajput and 5 ors.

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (2009)2GLR1348

..... court and number of decisions have been considered. the division bench of allahabad high court can not elobrate decision and also consider word used of motor vehicle act in section 92(a) covers accident which occurred both when vehicle is in motion and when it is stationary. the allahabad high court also considered decision of apex court ..... applied to fact of this case found from para 12 to 26 are quoted as under:12. thus, from the aforesaid discussion, it is categorically clear that the explosion and fire resulting in injuries, which led the death of deepak uttam more was dues to an accident arisen out of the use of the motor vehicle, viz ..... entitled if the fair and a reasonable meaning is given to the aforesaid expression. the aforesaid view also stands fortified from statement of law made under section 175 of motor vehicle act, where the claims tribunal shall have exclusive jurisdiction to entertain any claim for compensation which may be adjudicated upon by the claims tribunal for that .....

Hafiz Qari Mohammad Saukatullah S/O Ahmedullah Ghori. Vs. State of Guj ...

Court : Gujarat

..... -b, 302, 307, 153 (1), 451 of the indian penal code as well as under sections 25(1) (aa) of the arms act and sections 3 and 7 of the explosive substance act and also under section 135(1) of the bombay police act, which came to registered at cr no. i-314 of 2002 with sector 21 police station, gandhinagar.2.1 during ..... of the case, which has remained intact.2.6 the appellant feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the special judge, pota, filed the instant criminal appeal under section 34 of the pota.3 we have considered the submissions advanced by mr. m.h.m. shaikh, learned advocate for the appellant and mr. j.m. panchal, learned ..... criminal appeal filed under section 34 of the prevention of terrorist act (`pota' for short) is to the correctness of the order dated 29.10.2010, rendered in criminal misc. application no. 2907 of 2010, by the special judge (pota), ahmedabad, by which the application filed by the appellant under section 49 of the pota read with section 439 of the code .....

Anas Abdul Rashid MachiswalA. Vs. State of Gujarat.

Court : Gujarat

..... , held that the prosecution has established involvement of the present appellants in the commission of offence punishable under sections 3[1], 3[3] as well as section 4 read with section 3[3] of pota, under section 120-b of ipc, section 307 read with section 120-b of ipc, under section 4 of explosive substance act, under sections 3 and 4 of the prevention of damage to public property ..... are sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of two years and fine of rs.3000/- each, in default to undergo further simple imprisonment of six months; under section 4 of the explosive substance act, the appellants are sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay fine of rs.3000/- and in default, to undergo further simple imprisonment for one .....

Sunil Kumar Patodia Vs. Debts Recovery Tribunal - Ii âandeuro;andldqu ...

Court : Gujarat

..... as an order without jurisdiction and having regard to the observations by the hon'ble apex court in the decision in case between cct, orissa and ors. v. indian explosives ltd. (supra) and in the recent decision in case of sri siddeshwara co-operative bank ltd. (supra) this court is of the view that since a statutory ..... (supra) the hon'ble apex court has observed that:- 30. in satyawati tondon[1], the court was concerned with an argument of alternative remedy provided under section 17 of sarfaesi act. dealing with this argument, the court had observed that where an effective remedy was available to the aggrieved person, the high court must insist that before availing ..... constitution and should have directed the respondent to take recourse to the appeal mechanism provided by the act.? 12.1 in this context it is appropriate at this stage to refer to the decision in case of cct, orissa and ors. v. indian explosives ltd. [(2008) 3 scc 688] wherein hon'ble apex court observed that :- 3........the .....

Sankarda Sanyukt Kheti Sahkari Mandali Limited and Another Vs. State o ...

Court : Gujarat

..... safeguards available against arbitrary exercise of power. in the present case, again, considering the aforementioned background, there has been issuance of a show cause notice under section 107 of the act, pursuant to the order in earlier round of litigation, some of the references which have been made in the notice may not be the reasons for ..... , it would be apt to remember the decisions of the apex court in this regard. the apex court in case of cct, orissa and ors. vs. indian explosives limited, reported in (2008) 3 scc 688 was considering the judgment of division bench of the high court entertained against the show cause notice issued under the orissa ..... court needs to remind itself of the fact that in the earlier round of litigation, while permitting the district registrar to take recourse to the provisions of section 107 of the act, of course on due application of mind and when such proceedings were instituted, the court had expected the petitioner herein to raise all contentions in the .....

Munneshbhai Indrajitlal Choksi Vs. State of Gujarat

Court : Gujarat

..... were in all probability likely to cause death of any student travelling in the bus. yes, they could definitely be held liable for a rash or a negligent act, punishable under section 304a of the ipc, if ultimately necessary evidence in that regard comes on record at the time of the trial. 28. in the aforesaid context, the ..... 1968 sc 1319) that deaths and injuries caused by the contravention of a prohibition in respect of the substance which are highly dangerous as in the case of explosives in a cracker factory which are considered to be of a highly hazardous and dangerous nature having sensitive composition where even friction or percussion could cause an ..... explosion, that contravention would be the causa causans. 11. bearing these principles in view, what we have to see is : (1) whether there was contravention of the rule? .....