Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR2008Guj29; 2008(1)ARBLR624(Gujarat); (2008)1GLR525
ORDERK.A. Puj, J.1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Vadodara below an application Exh. 17 in Misc. Application (Arbitration) No. 148 of 2002 on 6 10-2005, whereby further objections filed by the petitioner vide Exh. 16 were ordered 10 be rejected and ordered to be filed.2. It is the ease of the petitioner that the State of Gujarat invited the tenders pertaining to the work of providing and connecting the Hume Steel Pipes. An agreement between the parties was entered into on 14-7-1992. The work order was issued to the present respondent No. 1. The respondent No. 1 was required to complete the work within the prescribed time period. Because of the failure on the part of the respondent No. 1 90% work was completed and 10% work was to be completed in February, 1995. The respondent No. 1 carried out work of Rs. 99,98,054/- and the tender cost was fixed at Rs....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [2008]142CompCas562(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated July 25, 2007, of the learned company judge in Official Liquidator Report No. 105 of 2007 in Company Petition No. 140 of 2006.2. M/s. Superior Sox Ltd. was ordered to be wound up by the company court by judgment dated November 13, 2006, in Company Petition No. 140 of 2006. This company petition arose from the opinion dated June 13, 2006, recorded by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction ('the B1FR') under Sub-section (1) of Section 20 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred as 'the SICA') opining that it was just, equitable and in public interest that the company was not likely to become viable in future and hence M/s. Superior Sox Ltd. should be wound up. This opinion was recorded after observing that the promoters of the company were not serious in rehabilitating the company nor were they resourceful enough to mobilize the funds required for that purpose. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2007)1GLR213
M.R. Shah, J.1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks to challenge the provisions of Gujarat Tax on Entry of Specified Goods for the Local Areas Act, 2001 (Entry Tax Act) [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'] as ultra vires the Constitution of India being violative of Articles 301 and 304 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner also seeks to challenge the notices issued by the respondents No. 3 and 4 dated 24th March 2004, 1st April 2004 and 27th May 2004 at Annexure 'B' to the petition by which the petitioner is called upon to produce the certificate with regard to payment of entry tax.2. The Statement and Objects of the Act, the Preamble, and the relevant provisions of the Act are as under;Statement of Objects and Reasons (Bill No. 36 of 2001):This Bill seeks to introduce the entry tax on the specified goods with a view to giving effect to the proposal contained in the Budget Speech of the Finance Minister in the Legislative Asse...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : II(1993)ACC638; 1993ACJ630; (1993)2GLR1051
C.V. Jani, J.1. This appeal filed by an insurance company under section 110D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), has been referred to us by the Division Bench, consisting of S. B. Majmudar and I. C. Bhatt JJ., as they then were, which took the view that section 95(2)(b)(i) of the Act required correct interpretation in view of the apparently conflicting judgments of two Division Benches of this court in Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Ganchi Ramanlal Kantilal [1979] ACJ 65 (Guj) and State of Gujarat v. Hansa Visanji Rana [1988] 2 TAC 135. The order for reference was made at the time of admitting the appeal, and the relevant portion of the said order which relates to the controversy is reproduced hereinbelow : 'Admit. This appeal is directed to be referred to a larger Bench in view of the fact that the decision of which the appellant-insurance company relies in the case of State of Gujarat v. Hansa Visanji Rana [1988] 2 TAC 135, comes t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1965Guj234a
Desai, C.J. (1) This special civil application raises important questions of law relating to the construction of some of the provisions of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956. There has been a divergence of opinion between the State Government on the one hand and the Central Government on the other, and divergent views have been held at different times. The petitioners are persons employed in the subordinate secretariat service of the Government of the State of Gujarat. Prior to the reorganisation of the State of Bombay on 1st November 1956, they were employed in the subordinate secretariat service of the existing State of Bombay. They have prayed for the issue of a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to restrain the State of Gujarat, its agents and servants from implementing the resolution dated 1st April 1960,passed by the Government of the former State of Bombay where under an alteration had been made in the previous...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1973Guj117; (1972)GLR1006
Bhagwati, C.J.1. This ground up nineteen petitioner raises an interesting question of construction of certain provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development ) Act 1957 and the Mineral Concession Rules 1960. The facts giving rise to the petitions are identical the save for difference in the area and location of the lands in respect of which mining lease is sought by the petitioner and it would, therefore, be sufficient if be we taken one of the petition, namely, Special Civil Application No. 1045 of 1968 as a representative petition and state of the facts of that petition.2. The petition in Special Civil Application No. 1045 of 1968 carry on business of the mining and they are also dealers in minerals. Bauxite is an important mineral having it uses as raw material in several industrial including manufacture of alumina. There are fairly large deposit of bauxite in three districts of the State of Gujarat, namely, Jamnagar, Junagadh and Kutch. The Government of Gujarat by...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2008)3GLR2004
M.R. Shah, J.1. As common question of law arises in both these appeals, they are being disposed of by this common judgement and order.2. First Appeal No. 4717 of 2006 is by the appellant herein - original respondent No. 2 - National Insurance Company, challenging the judgement and order dtd.20/1/2006 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Vadodara in Workmen Compensation Case No. 67 of 2001 in so far as directing the appellant - Insurance Company to pay an amount of Rs. 4,27,140 towards the Workmen Compensation with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of accident till realisation. 3. First Appeal No. 1044 of 2007 is by the appellant herein - original respondent (employer) challenging the judgement and order dtd.25/9/2006 passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Bharuch in Workmen Compensation Application No. 63 of 1994 in so far as directing the appellant to pay an amount of Rs. 67,139 towards workmen compensation with 50% penalty with ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2008(120)ECC231; 2008(156)LC231(Gujarat); 2008(232)ELT600(Guj)
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.1. By this appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962, Commissioner of Customs, Kandla is before this Court being aggrieved by judgment and order dated 26.12.2006 rendered in Appeal No. C/978/2006 by the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad bearing No. A/42/WZB/A'bad/07, whereby the Tribunal set aside the order of the Commissioner of Customs, Kandla dated 16.05.2006 being Order in Original No. KDL/COMMR/21/2006 and issued following directions:7. Taking into account the ratio of various judgments quoted by the learned Advocate for the appellant, the order of the Commissioner is set aside with the following directions:a. The bills of entry filed by M/s Magpie Overseas Co. should be treated as cancelled.b. The present appellant shall be permitted to file fresh bill of entry/bills of entry in respect of the entire quantity of 500Mts.c. The appellant shall file fresh bill of entry without claiming exemption under Notificatio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2008)1GLR736
S.R. Brahmbhatt, J.Heard learned Counsels for the parties.1. In these two petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the General Standing Order [GSO] No. 322 date 4/5/1996 revoking the benefits and provisions of Higher Grade Pay Scale sanctioned vie Circular No. 578 dated 8/4/1993 ab-initio and all the orders made thereunder, on the grounds that the revoking of Circular No. 578 which was issued pursuant to valid 2 (p) settlement dated 5/4/1993 made between he petitioners through their Unions and the management of the then Gujarat Electricity Board which is now been represented by its successors under Section 2(p) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.2. As both these petitions involve identical challenge and the respondents are the same, these matters were heard together and are being disposed of by this Common Judgment & Order.3. Facts in brief deserve to be set out in order to appreciate the controversy in these petitions.The petitioners ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [1969]23STC288(Guj)
Mehta, J.1. The short question which has been referred to us is :- 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the sale of corrugated sheets by the opponent-firm was covered by entry 80 of Schedule B or entry 15 of Schedule B to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953, prior to its amendment by Bombay Act 16 of 1957 ?' 2. The short facts which have given rise to this reference are :- The opponent-firm is a registered dealer dealing in iron and steel, gold and silver, vegetable ghee, corrugated iron sheets etc. It was assessed according to best judgment for the period from 1st April, 1956, to 31st March, 1957, by an order passed by the Sales Tax Officer, Godhra, on 30th June, 1962. The assessee appealed to the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax which was dismissed and its revision was only partially allowed by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax. The Deputy Commissioner held that entry 15 of Schedule B relating to iron and steel only included primary products of the rolling mill...
Tag this Judgment!