Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2003)2GLR1343
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. This group of appeals has been preferred by persons who were appointed as ad hoc lecturers pending the availability of the regular recruits through the Gujarat Public Service Commission (G.P.S.C. for short), to the post of Lecturer, Gujarat Educational Service, Class II, (Collegiate Branch), against the common judgment and order dated 15th July, 2002 passed by the learned single Judge allowing the Special Civil Application No. 2395 of 2001 and other cognate matters which were filed by the candidates selected through the G.P.S.C. as per the Recruitment Rules applicable to the said post and rejecting the Special Civil Application No. 4396 of 2001 and other cognate matters which were filed by the ad hoc appointees, who were required to be replaced by the G.P.S.C. selectees.2. In Special Civil Application No. 2395 of 2001 and its cognate matters which were filed by the direct selectees through the G.P.S.C., it was prayed that the petitioners should be appointed to th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR2003Guj177
ORDERH.K. Radhod, J. 1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. R. M. Chhaya on behalf of the petitioner-Municipal Corporation and learned advocate Mr. P. R. Nanavati appearing on behalf of the respondents in each petition.2. Rule. Learned advocate Mr. P. R. Nanavati waives service of Rule on behalf of the respective respondent.3. The brief facts giving rise to the present petition are as under :--The respondent No. 1 was allotted the right of superstructure on Block No. 5/A/3 of the property belonging to the petitioner Corporation situate behind Lal Bungalow, C.G. Road known as Ellisbridge Staff Quarters on the basis of the Resolution No. 1967 dated 5th January, 1989. It was specific condition of the said resolution that the respondent shall not transfer ownership and possession of the said property to any third without prior permission of the Municipal Corporation. According to the Corporation, the respondent No. 1 after having taken benefit of the said resolution, the respondent No. 1 has transf...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2003)2GLR1308
Jayant Patel, J. 1. Upon the note for fixing early date of hearing, with the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.2. The short facts of the case are that the petitioners were promoted to the post of Assistant Secretaries to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of this Court from the post of Private Secretaries to the Hon'ble Judges. At the relevant point of time, for the post of Private Secretaries, the pay-scale was Rs. 2000-3500. So far as the Assistant Secretaries are concerned, the pay-scale was Rs. 2500-4200. The pay-scale of the Private Secretaries to the Hon'ble Judges was thereafter upgraded and they were placed in the pay-scale of Rs. 3000-4500. Since the post of Assistant Secretaries to the Hon'ble Chief Justice was higher and rather a promotional avenue from the post of Private Secretaries to the Hon'ble Judges, there should have been a revision in the pay-scale of Assistant Secretaries to the Hon'ble Chief Justice also, but there was no revision and the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [2003]261ITR113(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J. 1. This group of 32 matters has been arguedtogether having regard to the nature of controversy and the common questions of law involved, which are as under :I. Questions of law involved in these appeals :In Tax Appeal No. 273 of 2002 :(1) Whether the usance interest paid by the assessee apart from the purchase price of the ship would fall within the scope of the definition of the term 'interest' under Section 2(28A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? (2) Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act for the failure on the part of the assessee to deduct tax at source from usance interest paid to a non-resident under Section 195(1) of the Act ? (3) Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in law and on facts in holding that usance interest partakes of the character of purchase price and therefore not liable to deduction at source under Section 195(1) of the Act ? (4) Whether the Appellate Tribun...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 181(2003)CLT134
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. This group of 32 matters has been argued together having regard to the nature of controversy and the common questions of law involved, which are as under:I. Questions of law involved in these appeals : In Tax Appeal No. 273 of 2002'(1) Whether the usance interest paid by the assessee apart from the purchase price of the ship would fall within the scope of definition of term 'interest' under Section 2(28A) of the IT Act, 1961?(2) Whether the Tribunal was right in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act for the failure on the part of the assessee to deduct tax at source from a usance interest paid to a non-resident under Section 195(1) of the Act ?(3) Whether the Tribunal was right in law and on facts in holding that usance interest partakes the character of purchase price and, therefore, not liable to deduction at source under Section 195(1) of the Act ?(4) Whether the Tribunal was right in law and on facts in allowing the d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2003)181CTR(Guj)134
R.K. Abichandani, J.This group of 32 matters has been argued together having regard to the nature of controversy and the common questions of law involved, which are as under:I. Questions of law involved in these appeals :In Tax Appeal No. 273 of 2002'(1) Whether the usance interest paid by the assessee apart from the purchase price of the ship would fall within the scope of definition of term 'interest' under section 2(28A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?(2) Whether the Tribunal was right in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance under section 40(a)(i) of the Act for the failure on the part of the assessee to deduct tax at source from a usance interest paid to a non-resident under section 195(1) of the Act ?(3) Whether the Tribunal was right in law and on facts in holding that usance interest partakes the character of purchase price and, therefore, not liable to deduction at source under section 195(1) of the Act ?(4) Whether the Tribunal was right in law and on facts in allowing t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2003)4GLR554
H.K. Rathod, J. 1. These petitions have been filed by the petitioner State of Gujarat challenging two common awards passed by the Labour Court, Surat under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. Heard Mr. A.D. Oza for the petitioners in this group of petitions. The Labour Court, Surat has passed two common award dated 13th June, 2002 one in Reference (LCS) No. 47 of 1999 to 51 of 1999, 15 of 1999 to 84 of 1999, 146 of 1999 to 151 of 1999, 186 of 1999 to 361 of 1999. The Labour Court, Surat has also passed second common award of the same date in Reference No. 205 of 1995 to 622 of 1995. In both the common awards, the labour court, Surat has granted the same and similar benefits as well as issued some similar directions in favour of the respondent workmen. The labour court, Surat has directed the second party respondent workmen to submit detailed residential address, ration card and the election card or any other Government documents along with the certificate of birth date to the E...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2004ACJ629; (2003)3GLR2386
J.N. Bhatt, Acting C.J.1. In both these appeals, common questions are involved and they arise out of common judgment and award. Upon joint request, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. A claim petition came to be filed by the heirs and legal representatives, original-petitioners, appellants in First Appeal No. 241 of 1992, inter alia, contending that they lost their bread-winner in a road accident which occurred on 4-1-1988. The deceased was travelling on a scooter bearing No. GUJ-982 on National Highway No. 8 near Dabhan and was driving his scooter in slow speed on the correct side. At that time, original opponent No. 1, Shanabhai Prajapati, driving Matador-Tempo bearing No. GRW-2, came with excessive speed and dashed with the scooter on the wrong side, as a result of which deceased Yogesh Chandulal Mehta, sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the same during the course of treatment. Original opponent No. 1, Shanabhai was the driver, original-opponent No. 2, Is...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : III(2004)ACC260
J.N. Bhatt, Actg. C.J.1. In both these appeals common questions are involved and they arise out of common judgment and award. Upon joint request they are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. A claim petition came to be filed by the heirs and legal representatives original petitioners, appellants in First Appeal No. 241 of 1992, inter alia, contending, that they lost their breadwinner in a road Accident which occurred on 4.1.1988. The deceased was travelling on a scooter bearing No. GUJ 982 on National Highway No. 8 near Dabhan and was driving his scooter in slow speed on the correct side. At that time original opponent No. 1, Shanabhai Prajapati driving Matador tempo bearing No. GRW. 2 came with excessive speed and dashed with the scooter on the wrong side as a result of which deceased Yogesh Chandulal Mehta sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the same during the course of treatment. Original opponent No. 1, Shanabhai was the driver, original opponent No. 2, Ishwarbhai ...
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!