Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [2004]49SCL340(Guj)
C.K. Buch, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. P.J. Davawala, Addl. Standing Counsel for Central Government. Ms. Davawala has tendered today the letter dated 3-7-2003 received by her from the Registrar of Companies, Gujarat State, Ahmedabad along with the letter dated 27-6-2003 received by her from the Regional Director, Government of India, Ministry of Finance and Company Affairs. These letters are taken on record.2. These are the petitions filed by two petitioner companies for sanction of a scheme of arrangement in the nature of de-merger and transfer of Vatva Division of Patels Airtemp (India) Limited (the De-merged/ Transferor Company) to Patels Airflow Limited (the Resulting/Transferee Company) under Section 391 read with Section 394 of the Companies Act, 1956.3. Both the petitioner companies are public limited companies. The Demerged/Transferor company (PAT) is engaged in manufacturing of wide range of Equipments like Heat Exchangers, Industrial Fans and b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [2006]129CompCas471(Guj)
C.K. Buch, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners Mrs. Swati Soparkar and Ms. P.J. Davawala learned additional standing counsel for the Central Government.2. Ms. Davawala has tendered today the letter dated August 21, 2003, received by her from the Registrar of Companies, Gujarat, Ahmedabad, sending therewith the xerox copy of the letter dated July 3, 2003 and the letter dated August 13, 2003, of the Regional Director, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Company Affairs. These letters are taken on record.3. These are the petitions filed by the two petitioner companies for sanction of a scheme of arrangement in the nature of demerger and transfer of the manufacturing division of United Phosperous Ltd. (the demerged/ transferor company) with Search Chern Industries Ltd. (the resulting/transferee company) under Section 391 read with Section 394 of the Companies Act, 1956.4. Both the petitioner companies are public limited companies. The demerged/transferor comp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2003)3GLR2595
Kundan Singh, J. 1. This Revision Application has been preferred by the petitioners-original defendants-tenants against the judgment and order dated 30.8.2002 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 31 of 1997 passed by the 5th Extra Assistant Judge, Kheda at Nadiad whereby the judgment and decree dated 10.2.1997 in Regular Civil Suit NO. 338 of 1990 passed by the 5th Joint Civil Judge (S.D.), Nadiad for recovery of actual, vacant and physical possession of the suit shop from the defendants has been confirmed.2. The petitioner no.1 Popatlal Vadilal Bhansali is the original tenant of the suit property which was rented to him for business purpose. The petitioner no.1 was doing his business of hosiery and readymade clothes in the name and style of Deepmala Dresses. Thereafter, that business name was changed and the firm Parth Jewellers was started in the suit premises. The respondents-plaintiffs did not see the petitioner no.1 sitting regularly in the suit shop. Hence, they filed Regular Civil Suit n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR2004Guj102; (2003)3GLR2563
Akshay H. Mehta, J.1. The aforesaid First Appeals are filed by the original defendants. First Appeal No. 889 of 1984 has been filed by original defendants nos. 1, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15; whereas First Appeal No. 1118 of 1984 has been filed by original defendants nos. 16, 17, 18 and 19. These appeals have been filed by them for challenging the judgment and decree dated 27th March, 1984 passed by the learned 3rd Joint Civil Judge [S.D.] Nadiad in Special Civil Suit No. 15 of 1982 allowing the suit of the original plaintiffs and passing the decree of specific performance directing original defendants nos. 1, 2, 3 and 6 to 19 to execute sale deeds in favour of original plaintiffs upon their paying the balance amount of Rs. 3,37,800/=.1.1. The Civil Revision Application (for short 'CRA') has been filed by original plaintiff no. 2 against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge [S.D.] Anand in Special Execution Petition No. 28 of 2000 seeking execution against the original de...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR2004Guj83
C.K. Buch, J. 1. This appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure is preferred by the appellants -original defendants of Special Civil Suit No. 2/1991 against the judgment and order dated 30.9.1995 passed by the ld. Civil Judge (S.D.), Porbandar whereby suit of the respondent -original plaintiff company has been decreed. Appellants are the original defendants and respondent is the original plaintiff and for the sake of convenience, they will be referred to hereinafter as defendants and plaintiff respectively. Ld. Civil Judge decreed the suit holding that the plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of Rs. 37,17,548-00 from the defendants with running interest at the rate of 12% p.a. from the date of the suit till its realisation with costs of the suit.2. To appreciate the rival contentions raised by the ld. Senior counsel appearing for the parties, it would be appropriate to narrate the facts of the case in nutshell.2.1 It is the case of the plaintiff that plaintiff compan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2004)1GLR488
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. This appeal is filed by the original plaintiff against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Navsari on 6th August, 1980 in Special Civil Suit No. 113 of 1977, dismissing the suit in which the appellant had sought a declaration that the registered sale deeds dated 14th August, 1973 and 27th November, 1973 made in favour of the respondent-original defendant, were void ab initio, being without consideration and not intended to be acted upon, and seeking possession of the properties in question which were agricultural lands.2. As per the averments made in the plaint, the appellant was the owner of the lands bearing survey nos. 358, 359, 389, 223, 349, 240 and 294, situated at village Manekpor of District: Navsari. The plaintiff had inherited the lands under a registered Will dated 22nd December, 1971, which was executed by his elder brother Nathubhai. The plaintiff had entrusted the management of these lands to the defendant wh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2004)1GLR729; (2004)IILLJ970Guj
..... authority of india limited is a government of india enterprise. it is a government company registered under the provisions of the companies act, 1956. it is engaged in production and marketing of iron and steel items, such as, angles, bars, coils, wires, rods, looms, billets, iron girders etc. the company has its steel manufacturing plants at bokaro, rourkela, bhilai, ..... the respondents happened to be members and being members, they had been supplied by m/s.bandel handling porters cooperative society limited for doing the work for eastern railway. it was found that the work which the respondents had been doing was of perennial nature. the central administrative tribunal, after considering the evidence on record, had given ..... mazdoor sabha & ors., a.i.r. 1995 sc 1893, (f) achutananda baidya v. prafullya kumar gayen & ors., (1997) 5 scc 76, (g) indian petrochemicals corporation ltd. & anr. v. shramik sena & ors., a.i.r. 1999 sc 2577, (h) steel authority of india ltd. & ors. v. national union .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2004)1GLR381
1. The present group of petitions are filed by the State of Gujarat, through its Deputy Collector, Choryasi Prant, Surat, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying for quashing and setting aside the order dtd. 29.02.1996 passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in 89 Revision Applications being TEN B.S. 229/93 to 261/93, 317/93 to 345/93, 66/94, 114/94, 249/94 to 263/94, 275/94, 131/95, 132/95 and 151/95 to 157/95, whereby the Tribunal has allowed all the aforesaid 89 Revision Applications filed by the present respondent No.1 i.e. Shri Sachin Udyognagar Sahkari Mandali Ltd., Surat, quashing and setting aside the orders of Deputy Collector, Choryasi Prant, Surat and Deputy Collector (L.R.), Surat.2. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent No.1 Society was formed for the exclusive object and purpose of setting up an industrial township in the area covering the villages Sachin, Vanz, Lapore, Popada and Bhatia in Choryasi Taluka of Surat District. At the relevant po...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2003)3GLR2701; (2004)IILLJ282Guj
P.B. Majmudar, J. 1. Since the point involved in this group of Special Civil Applications is common and since all these petitions are filed against the common Award passed by the Labour Court, Vadodara, all these petitions, filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, are decided by this common judgment.2. The point which is involved in these petitions is in connection with the status of the employees, who have been transferred from one Undertaking / Company to another Company, by an Agreement, and, ultimately, the effect of cancellation of such agreement. The concerned workmen were, initially, appointed by Apart Private Limited, a Private Limited Company, incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. At the relevant time, they were discharging their duties in the Welding Electrodes Division of the said Company. In the year 1987, an Agreement was entered into between the said Apart Private Limited and one Lotherme Electrodes (India) Private Limited, by whic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2004)1GLR50
M.S. Shah, J.1. This group of Letters Patent Appeals is directed against the judgment and order dated 2.5.2000 of the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application Nos. 3196 to 3217 of 1998 and connected petitions. The writ petitions were filed by co-operative banks/co-operative societies which are respondents herein. Some of the co-operative banks/societies have filed more than one petitions in respect of different fixed deposit receipts. Common contentions have been urged in all these appeals. Accordingly, the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.Proceedings before the learned Single Judge2.0 The facts leading to filing of the petitions are as under :-2.1 The petitions were filed by 22 co-operative banks or co-operative credit societies for directing Bank of Baroda and Indian Bank (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellants' or 'the Nationalized Banks') to refund the amounts of fixed deposit receipts which the petitioners had invested with...
Tag this Judgment!