Court : Gujarat
Oral Judgment: 1. This appeal is filed by original defendant No.1 State of Gujarat against whom as well as against respondent No.2, respondent no.1 herein original plaintiff filed Regular Civil Suit No. 67 of 1995 for declaration that the plaintiff is the Indian Citizen and continued to be the Indian Citizen until the defendants get decision against the plaintiff under section 9(2) of the Indian Citizenship Act (herein after referred to as the Act) and also praying for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from deporting the plaintiff till the defendants get such decision from the Central Government under section 9(2) of the Act. 2. It is the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff was born in Godhra, District Panchmahals on 25.4.1945 and his parents were also born in Godhra. It is averred that on 24.4.1950, the plaintiff was admitted in Saifiya Madaresa and studied there till 5th standard and thereafter, was admitted in Iqbal Union High School on 20.6.1956 and passed SSC E...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 1989CriLJ765; (1988)2GLR1404
ORDERM.B. Shah, J.1. The only question which requires determination in this revision application is whether the Superintendent, Central Excise, who has investigated the case is required to file complaint or submit charge-sheet before the Magistrate for the offences alleged to have been committed by the petitioner-accused under the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'.2. Learned Counsel Mr. Barot submitted that under Section 53 of the Act the powers of an officer in charge of a police station for investigation of the offences under the Act are given to the Central Excise Officers, the customs officers and other officers. Therefore, respondent No. 1 is required to submit charge-sheet after completion of the investigation and he cannot file private complaint before the learned Magistrate. For emphasizing his submission, he submitted that under different provisions of the Act different types of powers are conferred upo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, CJ. 1. All these three Special Civil Applications were taken up and heard together as a common question of law is involved in all these matters, viz. whether Section 66(1) (b) of the Factories Act, 1948 [the Act hereafter] and it s proviso are ultra vires the Constitution of India being violative of Articles 14, 15, 16, 19(1) (g) and 21 of the Constitution of India. 1.1 In Special Civil Application No. 11533 of 2013, an additional, alternative prayer has been made for a direction upon the State-respondent to issue appropriate notification as provided in the proviso to sub-section (b) of Section 66(1) of the Act enabling the petitioners to permit / employ women employees to work up to 10.00 p.m. 2. The facts stated in Special Civil Application No. 2984 of 2012 may be summarized thus: 2.1 The petitioner is a Public Charitable Trust registered under the provisions of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 and is engaged in the activity of upliftment of women and is active...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Cav Judgment: 1. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant-original accused seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this Court, praying for quashing of the first information report registered with the Athvalines Police Station, Surat City, vide I C.R. No.47 of 2012 of the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and also the charge-sheet filed by the Investigating Agency in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Surat. 2. The respondent No.2-original first informant although served with the Notice issued by this Court, dated 13th October, 2014 for final disposal yet has chosen not to appear either in person or through an advocate. This application has gone unopposed so far as the first informant is concerned. 3. The case of the prosecution may be summarized as under:- 3.1. The first informant and the applicant herein were serving with the Tata AIG Life Insurance Company at Surat. The first informa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1964)0GLR804
1. During the course of my experience at the bar and on the Bench I have come across very few petitions under section 397 or 398 of the Companies Act, 1956, which have been brought to a conclusion. The remedy under section 397 or 398 as a weapon in the shareholders' armoury has proved more potent when brandished in terrorem than when actually used to strike and it has, therefore, in most cases served as an effective threat to induce those in control to behave reasonably towards all interests and in some cases where those in control have not behaved reasonably and the remedy has been invoked, the proceedings have mostly terminated in a compromise securing the interests sought to be prejudiced by those in control. This petition has been an exception and the only reason I can see for its having run its full course is that there is absolutely no merit in it. I shall immediately proceed to state the facts giving rise to the petition. The facts are many and to some extent disputed and it is,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2008)1GLR346
A.M. Kapadia, J.1. Criminal Confirmation Case No. 7 of 2005 arises pursuant to submission of the proceedings of Sessions Case Nos. 11 of 2002 and 18 of 2003 made under Section 366(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code' for short) by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, District Kachchh at Bhuj, who, by his judgment and order dated 14-10-2005, has sentenced respondent-Shahnawaz Abdulgafur Bhatti, the accused of Sessions Case No. 18 of 2003, ('the accused' for short) to death for commission of offence punishable under Section 121 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code ('I.P.C for short) whereas Criminal Appeal No. 2317 of 2005 filed under Section 374(2) of the Code by the accused Shahnawaz Abdulgafur Bhatti from the jail is also directed against the judgment and order dated 14-10-2005 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, District Kachchh at Bhuj, in Sessions Case No. 18 of 2003 by which the appellant/ accu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [2001]103CompCas1041(Guj); (1995)1GLR673
M.B. Shah, J.1. The question involved in these appeals is whether injunction granted by the learned single judge should be continued till the company petition filed under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956, is decided. The hearing of the application for grant or refusal of an injunction pending the hearing of the main matter would not normally take much time. Still however, the matter is required to be heard at length because of heavy stake, the so-called public interest and the vexed questions of law involved in the matter, even though the main company petition is fixed for final hearing shortly. In this background, it would be appropriate to begin with the underlying observations made by Chinnapa Reddy J. in the case of Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Escorts Ltd. [1986] 59 Comp Cas 548 as under (at page 559) :'Problems of high finance and broad fiscal policy which truly are not and cannot be the province of the court for the very simple reason that we lack the ne...
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 : AIR1986Guj209; (1986)1GLR1
ORDER1-2. x x x x 3. The questions referred for consideration of the larger bench are whether the Labour Courts under the Bombay Industrial Relations Act and the Industrial Disputes Act and Industrial Courts under the Bombay Industrial Relations Act and Industrial Tribunals under the Industrial Disputes Act are Courts and Courts subordinate to the High Court in terms of S. 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, and whether the Board of Nominees functioning under S. 96 of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 as well as the Co-operative Tribunals constituted under the said Act are courts and courts subordinate to the High Court within the meaning of section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 4. In order to answer the aforesaid questions, it will be necessary to have a look at the relevant statutory provisions holding the field.11. Statutory provisions :- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 defines contempt of courts ~s per section 2 of the said Act. Civil contempt is defined by section ...
Tag this Judgment!