Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Aug-04-1976
Reported in : AIR1977Guj23; (1976)GLR1152(GJ)
Reddi, C.J.1. This Special Civil Application has been referred to a Full Bench by a Division Bench consisting of P. N. Bhagwati, C. J., (as he then was) ,and M. U. Shah, J., as in their opinion the two decisions rendered by this Court in Kaushikpr,asad v. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, (1970) 11 Guj LR 993 ,and Mohanlal Jesingbhai v. P. J. Patel, (1970) 11 Guj LR 1035 to which one of them (Bhagwati C. J.) was a party required reconsideration as the attention of the Court was not drawn to certain provisions and particularly Section 56 of the Bombay Town Planning Act which seemed to suggest that the view taken by them may not be correct.2. The relevant facts leading to the filing of this petition may briefly be stated. The Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation by a notification dated July 19, 1951 declared its intention to make a Town Planning Scheme under sub-section (1) of Section 9 of the Bombay Town Planning Act, 1915, in respect of the area of land shown in Plan No. 40 marked and verged...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Apr-01-1976
Reported in : [1977]107ITR172(Guj)
B.K. Mehta, J.1. The assessment year under reference is 1968-69, the corresponding previous year being the calendar year 1967. The assessee is a public limited company having a textile mill at Ahmedabad. It debited cloth kharajat account in its trading books with an amount of Rs.18,247 with a view to make provision for payment to the Textile Commissioner for non-fulfilment of export obligations undertaken for the use of 'sanforized' trade mark. The Income-tax Officer held that the said payment was by way of penalty and, therefore, could not be considered as incidental to carrying on of the business. He, therefore, disallowed the said expenditure by his assessment order of February 25, 1970. There were other claims and contention advanced on behalf of the assessee before the Income-tax Officer with which we are not concerned in this reference. The assessee being dissatisfied with the order of the Income-tax Officer carried the matter in appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Mar-25-1976
Reported in : (1977)18GLR346
M.P. Thakkar, J.1. A country craft named 'Jaywanti Prasad', bearing Registration No UMR 232 was intercepted at 15-30 hours on April 24, 1974 by Customs Officers of Bulsar Division who were patrolling the sea-coast pursuant to intelligence received by them. The Customs Officers boarded the vessel and brought it to Bulsar Jetty. On enquiry from respondent No. 1 who was the owner of the vessel and the Tindel it was realised that the vessel was coming from Dubai and was bound for Bombay with contraband goods. The respondents did not possess any customs manifest, port clearance etc. or any documents of authorization entitling them to import the contraband goods. A search of the vessel revealed that it was carrying 51 packages of contraband goods valued at Rs. 1,64,450/- as on April 27, 1974. The search further revealed that it was also carrying foreign make fabrics manufactured in Japan which were also contraband articles valued at Rs. 4,50,000/- on April 27, 1974. Thus, in all contraband g...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Nov-04-1976
Reported in : (1976)17GLR1017
J.B. Mehta, J.1. The petitioner who was a Judge of this Court challenges in this petition the order of his transfer dated May 27, 1976 at Annexure 'A'. The short facts which have given rise to this petition are as under.2. The petitioner was enrolled as an advocate of the Bombay High Court on January 28, 1946. He practised at Bombay since his enrolment until April 30, 1960 and on the formation of the Gujarat State, he shifted his legal practice to this High Court where he practised till April 22, 1969. On April 23, 1969 he was appointed a Judge of the Gujarat High Court for a period of two years and was appointed a permanent puisne Judge on August 5, 1970. The petitioner' would retire on completion of the age of 62 years on January 5, 1981 and so, a period of about four years and six months was left for him to retire from service.3. The petitioner has been transferred by the impugned order to the Andhra Pradesh High Court without obtaining his consent, without consulting him and agains...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Aug-05-1976
Reported in : [1977(34)FLR244]; (1977)0GLR241; (1978)ILLJ235Guj
J.B. Mehta, J.1. The short question which arises before us is whether the decision in Nagri Mills Ltd. v. Textile Labour Association, Ahmedabad, 12 G.L.R. 417, which has unsettled the industrial law for a decade on this question of limitation under S. 79(4) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act', in respect of continuing illegal change is correctly decided. The textile Labour Association, a representative union, has come up in this petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the decision of the Industrial Court, dated October 23, 1974, dismissing the four applications which were filed by this representative union on behalf of the four concerned permanent watchmen working in the respondent-mill company for a declaration of illegal change as being time-barred. The concerned watchmen were made permanent on April 10, 1967, May 1, 1968, August 1, 1968, and May 1, 1968 respectively and on the ground of the customary concession ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Aug-05-1976
Reported in : AIR1977Guj37; (1977)GLR241
J.B. Mehta, J. 1. The short question which arises before us is whether the decision in Nagri Mills Ltd. v. Textile Labour Association, Ahmedabad, (1971) 12 Guj LR 417, which has unsettled, the industrial law for a decade on this question of limitation under Section 79 (0 of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act', in respect of continuing illegal change is correctly decided. The Textile Labour Association, a representative union, has come up in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the decision of the Industrial Court, dated. October 23, 1974, dismissing the four applications which were filed by this representative union on behalf of the four concerned permanent watchmen working in the respondent mill company for a declaration of illegal change as being time barred. The concerned watchmen were made permanent on April 10, 1967, May 1, 1968, August 1, 1.968 and May 1, 1968 respectively, and on the ground of the cu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Feb-12-1976
Reported in : AIR1978Guj13; (1977)GLR424
1. The plaintiffs appellants filed Civil Suit No. 2736 of 1975 in the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad on Sept. 10, 1975 claiming a permanent injunction against the defendants respondents restraining them from exhibiting the cinematographic picture named 'Jai Santoshl Maa'. Defendant-respondent No. 1 is a name and style of business carried on by defendant-respondent No. 2, who had produced the said movie. Defendant-respondent No. 3 is the Director of the movie and defendant respondent No. 4 had written the Them thereof Defendant-respondent No. 5 is the distributor and defendants-respondents Nos. 6 to 14 are the theatres wherein the aforesaid movie was exhibited in the City of Ahmedabad After filing of the suit the plaintiffs to* out a notice of motion for a temporary injunction restraining the exhibition of the movie by the defendants. On notice being given to the defendants, they appeared and showed cause. After hearing both the parties the learned City Civil Judge discharged the rule on t...
Tag this Judgment!