Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2005)3GLR2590
ORDER-XXII RULE-10-A10A. Duty of pleader to communicate to Court death of a party. - Where a pleader appearing for a party to the suit comes to know of the death of party, he shall inform the Court about it, and the Court shall thereupon give notice of such death to the other party, and, for this purpose, the contract between the pleader and the deceased party shall be deemed to subsist.]' Section 141 with Explanation given to it is reproduced as under:'141. Miscellaneous proceedings.- The procedure provided in this Code in regard to suits shall be followed, as far as it can be made applicable, in all proceedings in any Court of civil jurisdiction.[Explanation.-In this section, the expression 'proceedings' included proceedings under Order IX, but does not include any proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution.]'19. In Puran Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors. [AIR 1996 SC 1092], the apex court has examined the effect of explanation given to Section 141 of the Code of Civil...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1982)1GLR258
Thakkar, J.1. 'Till death doth us part' - the oath uttered at the time of solemnization of marriage may have to be altered into 'till the I.T. authorities doth us part' by the medicos who marry and intend to carry on their professional activities in partnership. That cannot be helped if the interpretation placed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in respect of the provision popularly known as the 'clubbing provision' embodied in s. 64(1)(i) of the I.T. Act of 1961 is untenable as is canvassed by the revenue. The said provision speaks as under : '64. (1) In computing the total income of any individual, there shall be included all such income as arises directly or indirectly - (i) to the spouse of such individual from the membership of the spouse in a firm carrying on a business in which such individual is a partner.' 2. In essence it provides that when the husband and the wife are members of the very same partnership firm carrying on a business, the income of the two is to be clubbed ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1982)27CTR(Guj)84; (1983)1GLR799; [1982]135ITR158(Guj)
Thakkar, J.1. A very vital question which was res integra till the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court consisting of A. P. Sen C.J. (as he then was) and J. S. Verma J., rendered their decision in CIT v. Seth Gopaldas (HUF) on April : [1979]116ITR577(MP) has given rise to the present reference at the instance of the assessee. The question is as to whether a Hindu father by virtue of his overriding powers as patria potestas recongnised by traditional Hindu law can effect a partial partition (in the sense of partion in respect of only some of the assets as contradistinguished from all the assets) at his own volition in respect of an HUF, consisting only of himself and his minor sons. By the aforesaid decision, which is the only decision on the point, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has taken the view that a Hindu father does not have any such power to effect a partial partition in the sense of division only of a part of HUF assets whilst maintaining or continuing the status of H...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1982)28CTR(Guj)126; [1982]135ITR146(Guj)
THAKKAR J.- 'Till death doth us part' - the oath uttered at the time of solemnization of marriage may have to be altered into 'till the I.T. authorities doth us part' by the medicos who marry and intend to carry on their professional activities in partnership. That cannot be helped if the interpretation placed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in respect of the provision popularly known as the 'clubbing provision' embodied in s. 64(1)(i) of the I.T. Act of 1961 is untenable as is canvassed by the revenue. The said provision speaks as under :'64. (1) In computing the total income of any individual, there shall be included all such income as arises directly or indirectly -(i) to the spouse of such individual from the membership of the spouse in a firm carrying on a business in which such individual is a partner.'In essence it provides that when the husband and the wife are members of the very same partnership firm carrying on a business, the income of the two is to be clubbed together...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR2002Guj197
D.M. Dharmadhikari, C.J. 1. This LPA has been listed before us with Civil Application No. 9257 of 2001 filed by the appellants seeking condonation of delay caused in filing the LPA in Civil Application No. 3602 of 2001 which was filed seeking order under Order 39, Rule 2A read with Section 151 of CPC. Civil Application No. 3602 of 2001 was disposed of by giving certain directions and observations by judgment and order dated 27-6-2001 which is the subject matter of this LPA. 2. On behalf of the respondents, learned counsel Mr. D. C. Dave raised an objection that the present LPA preferred against the order of the learned single Judge dated 27-6-2001 passed in the proceedings in appeal from order for alleged breach of the order of injunction passed therein under Order 39, Rule 2A read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure is not maintainable under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. 3. In support of the preliminary objection, it is stated that the impugned order which has been pass...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Common C.A.V. Order: Bhaskar Bhattacharya, CJ. 1. While admitting Letters Patent Appeals being LPA No. 1106/2011, 1107/2011, 1111/2011 and 1116 of 2011 preferred by unsuccessful petitioners of four different Special Civil Applications, a Division Bench of this Court presided over by the then the Chief Justice directed that in view of the importance of the issue involved therein, the matters should be heard by a larger Bench. Consequently, this Bench was constituted for hearing all those four LPAs. 1.1 Subsequently, after taking into consideration the fact that various Special Civil Applications were pending before the learned Single Judge involving the selfsame point, we decided to give opportunity of making submissions to the learned counsel for the petitioners in those Special Civil Applications at the time of hearing of the above four appeals. 2.2 The subject matter of the four LPAs indicated above is the decision of the District Collector, Kutch who issued instructions to the conce...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [1997]225ITR936(Guj)
Rajesh Balia, J.1. This case pertains to asst. yr. 1980-81. The assessee is a doctor and is specialist of radiology. He also operates an x-ray clinic of his own where the x-ray films are also exposed of the patients for which charges are required to be paid by the persons coming there. From the profit and loss account it is apparent that the assessee has shown the charges received from customers for exposing x-ray films as 'x-ray revenue' by deducting the total expenditure including the raw-films, other materials, salary and emoluments paid to staff and other expenses in connection with the running of the clinic, including interest on loans etc. It has not been shown as an income from fees. The assessee had, during that year purchased an x-ray machine. Apart from claiming depreciation thereon, the assessee also claimed investment allowance on the cost of acquisition of that x-ray machine under s. 32A of the IT Act, 1961, as it stood at the relevant time. The ITO was of the view that s....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1994)1GLR481
S. Nainar Sundaram, C.J.1. The appellants in these four Letters Patent Appeals are the petitioners in the Special Civil Applications, out of which they arise. We propose to refer to the appellants as 'petitioners' in this judgment of. ours.2. The petitioners are teachers in Government Colleges. The Government Colleges are affiliated to the Gujarat University. There is no dispute that the petitioners are Government servants. As such, they would be governed by the Bombay Civil Services Rules, hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules', framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. Rule 161 of the Rules prescribes the age of superannuation of Government servants of the category of the petitioners as 58 years. The petitioners, the said Rule governing, cannot be in service beyond the age of 58 years But, they are in the field of coveting the age of 60 years for superannuation on the ground that the Government Colleges, in which they are working are affiliated to the Gujarat University,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1991)2GLR1035
C.K. Thakker, J.1. A substantial question of general public importance having far-reaching effect has been raised in the present group of petitions. In view of the challenge to the constitutional validity of certain statutory rules, some petitions were placed for admission as well as for final hearing before the Division Bench. In view of the fact that a similar question was pending before the Division Bench, the learned single Judge has also referred some petitions to the Division Bench and that is how all these matters are before us for final hearing.Facts:2. For the purpose of appreciating the controversy in question, it may be necessary to state facts in the first petition briefly. In Special Civil Application No. 1816 of 1989, it is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as Range Forest Officer Class III on November 2, 1974 and was promoted to the post of Assistant Conservation of Forests, Class II which is a gazetted post. A charge-sheet dated August 21, 1984 was served...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2008GLH(1)527; (2008)2GLR1031
Jayant Patel, J.1. All in-service doctors, whose services are governed by various statutory Rules framed by the Government in exercise of the power under Article 309 of the Constitution, including that of Gujarat Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Conduct Rules' for the sake of convenience), Gujarat Civil Services (General Conditions of Services) Rules, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the 'General Rules' for the sake of convenience), and Gujarat Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2002 ((hereinafter referred to as the 'Pension Rules' for the sake of convenience), have preferred all the petitions for challenging the policy of the State Government vide Resolution dated 29.3.2007 for discontinuing Non-Practicing Allowance (hereinafter referred to as 'NPA' for the sake of convenience) and for permitting them for private practice after office hours. As the policy of the Government also provides for giving option to in-service doctors, who have completed 15 ye...
Tag this Judgment!