Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1962Guj208; [1962(4)FLR498]; (1961)GLR705; (1964)0GLR470; (1962)IILLJ342Guj
1-6. x x x x x x 7. The question that falls for determination is whether that cover, (of spur gear wheel --Ed.) having been removed without the knowledge or consent or connivance of the respondent(the manager of the Oil Mills--Ed.) he could still be held guilty of breach of Section 21(1)(iv)(c) read with Section 92 of the Art (Factories Act --Ed.). As we have said, the learned Magistrate found that he was not, and that finding has been strenuously challenged by the learned Government Pleader.8. The learned Government pleader contended that (1) under Section 21(1)(iv)(c) of the Act, the liability of the occupier or, the manager of a factory was absolute; and (2) that if Section 21(1)(iv)(c) were to be read with Section 101 of the Act, it would be clear that unless the occupier or manager of a factory, when charged with an offence punishable under this Act, files a complaint to have any other person whom he charges as the actual offender, brought before the court at the time appointed fo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [1962]32CompCas1162(Guj); (1962)GLR715
1. This application raises a short and interesting question of law regarding the right construction to be put on sections 87 to 90 of the Companies Act, 1956. These sections which relate to voting rights did not find a place in the Indian Companies Act, 1913, and have been introduced for the first time in the Companies Act, 1956. There is no provision in the English Companies Act, 1948, corresponding to these sections nor is there any authority of any High Court in this country which throws light on the interpretation of these sections. The question of construction posed by this application has, therefore, to be decided by me on the language of these sections unaided by any authority or dicta of any court in this country or in England. The facts giving rise to this application are few and for the most part undisputed and may be briefly stated as follows : The Lakhtar Ginning Company Private Limited was incorporated as a public company limited by shares in the old Lakhtar State in Decem...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1962)0GLR715
1. This application raises a short and interesting question of law ;regarding the right construction to be put insurrection 87 to 90 of the companies Act, 1956,. These sections which relate to voting rights did not find a place in the Indian Companies Act, 1913, and have been introduced for the first time in the Companies ACt, 1956. there is no provision in the English Companies Act, 1948, corresponding to theses section nor is there any authority of any High court in this country which throws light on the interpretation of these section. the question of construction posed by this application has, therefore, to be decided ;by me on the language of these section unpaid by any authority or dicta of any court in this court or in England. The facts gins rise to this application are few and for the most part undisputed and may be briefly stated as follows: The Lakhtar Ginning Company Private Limited was incorporated as a public company limited by shares in the old Lakhtar4 state in December...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1963Guj209; (1962)3GLR715
ORDERP.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This application raises a short and interesting question of law regarding the right construction to be put on Sections 87 to 90 of the Companies Act, 1956. These Sections which relate to voting rights did not find a place in the Indian Companies Act, 1913, and have been introduced for the first time in the Companies Act, 1956. There is no provision in the English Companies Act, 1948, corresponding to these sections nor is there any authority of any High Court in this country which throws light on the interpretation of these sections. The question of construction posed by this application has, therefore, to be decided by me on the language of these sections unaided by any authority or dicta of any Court in this country or in England. The facts giving rise to this application are few and for the most part undisputed and may be briefly stated as follows.2. The Lakthar Ginning Company Private Limited was incorporated as a public Company limited by shares in the old...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1968)9GLR511
N.M. Miabhoy, J.1. A decree has been passed by the learned District Judge, Kaira at Nadiad, in Divorce Suit No. 1 of 1961 on 1st September 1961, by which the learned Judge has declared the marriage between the petitioner Kanku and the respondent Shanabhai null and void, subject to the declaration being confirmed by this Court under Section 20 of the Divorce Act, 1869 (hereafter called 'the Act'). The learned District Judge by his letter, dated 1st March 1962, has sent the proceedings in the suit to this Court for confirmation. The petition, which was numbered in the District Court as Suit No. 1 of 19 1, was made by the petitioner under Section 18 of the Act. It is common ground that the petitioner and the respondent were married about 14 years ago under Hindu marriage rites. The petitioner first filed Suit No. 4 of 1960 in the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nadiad, under the Hindu Marriage Act, 19SS, for dissolution of that marriage on the ground that the husband h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1965Guj87; (1964)10GLR769
Miabhoy, J.(1) In this group of six appeals, a preliminary objection has been raised for decision. The objection was first raised when Letters Patent Appeal No. 8 of 1960 was called out for hearing. As the objection affected a number of other Letters Patent Appeals, we adjourned the hearing of the appeal and directed that all other Letters Patent Appeals in which the same objection was likely to be raised should be fixed for hearing them together so that the preliminary objection, if raised, could be decided after hearing all the learned Advocates appearing therein. It is in pursuance of that order that all the above appeals are fixed for hearing the preliminary objection if the same happens to be raised. This judgment will dispose of the preliminary objection which is raised by all the learned Advocates for the respondents in all the appeals.(2) The preliminary objection is that the present appeals are incompetent without the certificate of the learned Judgers of he Bombay High Court ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1966Guj166; 1966CriLJ749; (1966)GLR25
1. This matter arises out of an application by the petitioner to this Court praying for a leave to file an appeal under Section 417(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against an order of acquittal passed by Unjudicial Magistrate, First Class at Broach acquitting opponent No. 1, original accused of an offence under Section 400. I. P. C. in Criminal Case No. 1100 of 1959. That application for leave was dismissed by this Court on July 17, 1963 whereupon the petitioner prayed for a certificate for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of India under Article 134(1)(c) of the Constitution of India. There was a division of opinion between the two learned Judges constituting the Bench which heard the application under Article 134(1)(c) and hence the matter has been placed for disposal under Clause 36 of the Letters Patent.2. The petitioner in this application is the original complainant who had filed a complaint against opponent No. 1 in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Br...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1966)0GLR156
Bhagwati, J. 1. The petition raises the question of validity of certain provisions of the Bombay Labour Welfare Fund Act, 1953, as amended by the Bombay Labour Welfare Fund (Gujarat Extension and Amendment) Act, 1961, and the Bombay Labour Welfare Fund (Gujarat Amendment) Act, 1962. 2. The petitioner is a limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913. It is carrying on business of manufacturing cotton textiles and owns a factory situated in Ahmedabad. In its balance sheet for the year 1961 it showed as one of its liabilities a sum of Rs. 4,38,987 under the heading 'sundry creditors.' This amount included Rs. 2,37,863.85 which was made up of wages earned by the workmen in the factory but remaining undrawn by them and bonus for which no claim was made by the workmen within the prescribed time to earn the same under the condition of eligibility laid down in the relevant bonus agreements or awards and represented the total of such assumed liability from year to year eve...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1966Guj293; 1966CriLJ1429
Shelat, J.1. This appeal arises out of the judgment and Order passed on 22-4-1964 by Mr. N. B. Desai, Special Judge, Rajkot whereby the accused-appellant came to be convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500 in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for four months in respect of offences punishable under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.2. The accused-appellant was serving as a Medical Officer, Government City Dispensary at Morvi during the period from May to July 1963. He was class III Officer and was in charge of an out-door dispensary. On the upper storey of the dispensary-building, he had his residential quarters. The dispensary was a free dispensary for all people and that its working hours were 8-30 a.m. to 12-0 p.m. and from 4-0 p.m. to 6-30 p.m. On 6-5-1963 one Natvarsinhji alias Natubha Mansinhbhai of Derala had gone to Morvi along with his servants...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [1966]17STC100(Guj)
Bhagwati, J.1. A short question of construction of entry 14 of Schedule A to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, arises on this reference. The applicants carry on business of running a hotel and in the course of such business they serve cooked food and non-alcoholic drinks for consumption in the hotel and they also enter into catering contracts under which they serve cooked food and non-alcoholic drinks at their customers' premises through their servants for consumption there. On 2nd January, 1960, the applicants served through their servants fifty plates of refreshments consisting of pendas, bananas, wafers and tea at a price not exceeding rupee one for each person in pursuance of an order placed by A. V. Parekh Institute for consumption at the premises of the Institute. The applicants then applied to the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax under section 52 for determination of the question whether any tax was payable on the sales of refreshments made to A. V. Parekh Institute. The applicant...
Tag this Judgment!