Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: gujarat Year: 2005 Page 1 of about 30 results (0.006 seconds)

Sep 26 2005 (HC)

Bholabhai Chaturbhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Sep-26-2005

Reported in : (2005)3GLR2549

..... is at present on temporary bail. it is also true that one witness has mainly involved the said accused babulal shah who according to prosecution was acting as an inter-mediator in passing the kick back money to the management, has not named/involved the present petitioner as an accused. however, more than one witnesses i.e. prahladbhai karsanbhai, shaileshkumar kantilal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 29 2005 (HC)

Widow Hiruben Bijalbhai Harijan Vs. Special Secretary

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Mar-29-2005

Reported in : AIR2005Guj316

jayant patel, j.1. rule. mr.mengdey, learned agp waives service of rule for respondents. with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for both the sides, the matter is finally heard today. 2. the short facts of the case are that the husband of the petitioner was granted government land admeasuring 5 acres bearing survey no. 1202 at village bhalpara for growing trees for 30 years as per the order dated 14.12.1978. it is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners have made efforts to grow the maximum trees over the land and it was also the case of the petitioners before the collector that due to heavy rain and consequential flood in the area, the plants were destroyed and as a result thereof the requisite number of trees as per the resolution of the government could not be grown well in time. it appears that the district collector issued notice for termination of the lease on the ground that the requisite number of trees are not grown. the petitioners submitted reply and contended, inter alia, on the aspects of circumstances beyond the control for non-growing of the requisite number of trees. it also appears that the collector while passing the impugned order considered the matter on the ground that the requisite number of trees are not grown and relied upon the revenue record of village form no. 7 and 12 and it was shown that the crops were grown by the petitioner. it appears that thereafter the collector passed the order of forfeiture of the land. the matter was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 28 2005 (HC)

Kantibhai Ishwarbhai Patel Through His Heirs and Legal Representatives ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Mar-28-2005

Reported in : (2005)3GLR2110

a.m. kapadia, j.1. instant appeal u/s 96 of the code of civil procedure is directed against the judgement and decree dated september 30, 1995 rendered in special civil suit no. 170 of 1985 by the learned civil judge (sd), vadodara, by which the suit filed by the appellant against the respondents for partition, claiming 1/3rd share in the ancestral undivided properties, mentioned in para 2 a to u of the plaint, came to be dismissed.2. for the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as they are arrayed in the trial court.3. the facts giving rise to this first appeal are as follows:3.1 the plaintiff and the defendants are the real brothers and sisters. their father - isharbhai ranchhodbhai - died on 26.2.1982. the deceased isharbhai ranchodbhai was having ancestral properties of agricultural lands, gabhan land and houses mentioned in para 2 a to u of the plaint ('the suit properties' for short) . it was alleged in the plaint that the suit properties were the ancestral properties. the land bearing revenue survey no. 188 was also an ancestral property as the same was purchased from the income derived from cultivating ancestral properties bearing revenue survey no. 445 which was obtained by the deceased father as a tenant and therefore the suit properties shown in the plaint were ancestral properties. according to the plaintiff, he had 1/4th share in the suit properties by birth, as the suit properties were divided into four equal shares amongst three brothers and .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 10 2005 (HC)

Jhaverbhai Savjibhai Patel Through P.O.A. Holder Vs. Kanchanben Nathub ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : May-10-2005

Reported in : (2005)3GLR2233

jayant patel, j. 1. leave to delete respondent no.7 from special civil application no.8559/2005.2. with the consent of the parties, both the matters are taken up for final hearing today and as in both the petitions there are more or less common issues and common challenge, they are being considered together by this common order.3. rule. mr. a.j. patel, learned counsel appears for the private respondents and waives service of notice of rule. mr. mengdey, learned agp appears for state authorities and waives service of notice of rule for respondent authorities.4. upon hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it appears that the common question arise for consideration of the court is as to whether the entry mutated on the basis of the registered sale deed could have been ordered to be cancelled by the authority in toto or the authority ought to have allowed the revenue entry to be continued with the qualification and clarification that the same would be subject to the outcome of the proceedings of civil suit which is pending before the concerned competent court.5. as such it appears that there is no dispute on the point of the factual aspects regarding the existance of the registered sale deeds. however, the authority of the person who has executed the registered sale deed is disputed and the validity of the registered sale deed is not challenged in the civil suit no.497/2002. there is also no dispute on the point that the entry was initially entered in the revenue .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 25 2005 (HC)

Jagdishbhai B. Ravoot Vs. State of Gujarat

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Mar-25-2005

Reported in : (2005)2GLR1394

m.r. shah, j.1. rule. shri p.r. abichandani, the learned agp waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 & 3. shri dhaval c. dave, the learned advocate waives service of rule for respondent no. 5.2. with the consent of the learned advocates for the parties, the matter was heard finally and the matter is cav for prouncement of judgment.3. in this petition under article 226 of the constitution of india, a short but an interesting question of law has arisen to the effect that 'at the time of consideration of no confidence motion against the sarpanch as envisaged under section 56 of the gujarat panchayats act, 1993 [ hereinafter referred to as 'the act' ] and for consideration of strength of two-third, whether a vote of the sarpanch is required to be counted or not ?'4. though against the impugned decision of the taluka development officer dated 5.1.2005, the petitioners had preferred an appeal before the appellate committee of the district panchayat, valsad, however in view of the question of law which has arisen in the present special civil application, the learned advocates appearing for the parties requested to decide and dispose of the present special civil application on merits and to consider the legality and validity of the decision of the taluka development officer, umbergaon dated 5.1.2005 on merits and that is how, the present special civil application is being disposed of on merits considering the legality and validity of the decision of the taluka .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 21 2005 (HC)

The Peerless Genreal Finace and Investmet Co. Ltd. Vs. Essar Oil Limit ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Feb-21-2005

Reported in : [2006]129CompCas353(Guj); [2005]59SCL734(Guj)

k.a. puj, j.1. the applicant, namely, the peerless general finance & investment company limited has taken out this judge's summons making following prayers :-[a] that this hon'ble court be pleased to hold and declare that holding of meeting of the debenture holders holding more than 2000 debentures would not serve any fruitful purpose as more than one-fourth in value of debenture holders holding more than 2000 debentures are opposed to the scheme of arrangement / compromise by the respondent, in the interest of justice and equity;[b] that this hon'ble court be pleased to hold and declare that the meeting held on 26.10.2004 for consideration of the scheme of arrangement / compromise proposed by the respondent concludes that the scheme is defeated / has failed as the same is opposed by more than one-fourth in value of debenture holders holding more than 2000 debentures, in the interest of justice;[c] that this hon'ble court be pleased to vacate the order dated 04.04.2003 made by this hon'ble court in company application no. 166 of 2003, in the interest of justice and equity;2. this court has permitted the applicant to join the company, namely, essar oil limited as respondent and notice was issued on 06.12.2004 making it returnable on 17.12.2004. this court has passed further order on 29.12.2004 recording the submission of mr. s.n. soparkar, learned senior advocate appearing for the respondent company that without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respective parties .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 13 2005 (HC)

Kapilaben Ashokbhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and 3 ors.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Dec-13-2005

Reported in : (2006)2GLR1029

akshay h. mehta, j.1. as the subject matter of the petition as well as misc. civil application [ 'mca' for short] is the same, they were heard together by us and now they are being disposed of by this common cav judgment.2. the petition is filed by smt. kapilaben ashokbhai patel, who is also opponent no. 4 in the mca, but in this judgment she is referred to as 'the petitioner'. applicant of the mca is respondent no. 4 in the petition. accordingly he is referred to as respondent no. 4 in this judgment. rest of the parties are referred to in accordance with their position in the petition.2.1. the petition is filed for claiming relief to the effect that appropriate direction be given to respondent no. 1 to issue notification appointing appellate officer/authority for the development area of gandhinagar township in accordance with the provisions of section 5(1) of the gujarat regulation of unauthorized development act, 2001 [hereinafter referred to as 'the act']. by way of interim relief, it is prayed that the execution of order contained in communication dated 24th september, 2004 and order dated 24th september, 2004 of respondent no. 2 be stayed pending final disposal of the petition and also to restrain the agents and servants of respondent no. 2 from taking any coercive measures against the petitioner pursuant to notice dated 9th november, 2004.2.2. mca has been filed by respondent no. 4 requesting this court to take appropriate action against opponents nos. 1 to 18 under the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 17 2005 (HC)

Natwarlal Pitambardar Patel Vs. A.B. Trivedi

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Mar-17-2005

Reported in : (2005)2GLR1453

k.m. mehta, j.1. natwarlal pitambardas patel, petitioner, has filed this petition with a prayer that this court may issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction quashing and setting aside the order passed by respondent no. 1 dated 25.11.2004, rejecting the nomination paper of the petitioner as per the proceedings at annexure-a to the petition and direct respondent no. 1 i.e. election officer & deputy collector to declare the petitioner as elected chairman of respondent no. 2 bank i.e. mehsana district central co-operative bank ltd., mehsana.1.1 the petition was filed on 29.11.2004. this court (coram: jayant patel, j) issued notice on 2.12.2004. pursuant to the said notice on behalf of respondent no. 1 mr. a.d. oza, learned government pleader appears. mr. s.k. jhaveri, learned sr. advocate, appears on behalf of respondent no. 2 and mr. p.k. jani, learned advocate, appears on behalf of respondent no. 3 i.e. shri nitinbhai ratilal patel. on the joint request of the learned counsel for the parties, i have taken up the matter for hearing. hence rule. the learned counsel for the respondents waive service of rule.2. the facts giving rise to the petition are as under:2.1 the petitioner is a leading cooperative worker. the petitioner is connected with many other cooperative societies right from the village level to national level. it is the case of the petitioner that a criminal complaint had been filed in visnagar police station by the visnagar nagrik .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 08 2005 (HC)

Adani Exports Limited Vs. Marketing Service Incorporated and ors.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Feb-08-2005

Reported in : AIR2005Guj257; I(2006)BC545; 2006(1)CTLJ195(NULL)

k.s. jhaveri, j.1. appeal from order no. 130 of 2002 is at the instance of the original plaintiff in civil suit no.4068 of 2001, which has been filed against the order dated 23rd january 2002 passed by the city civil court below application exhibit 5 (notice of motion) in the civil suit no.4068 of 2001.2. appeal from order no.281 of 2002 has been filed against the order dated 23rd january 2002 passed by the city civil court below application exhibit 5 (notice of motion) in civil suit no.4068 of 2001. this appeal is at the instance of original defendant no.1 in the aforesaid suit.3. since in both the appeals the challenge is against the very same order, both the appeals are heard together and disposed of by this common judgement.4. m/s adani exports limited (hereinafter referred to as ael or plaintiff) had filed civil suit no.4068 of 2001 before the city civil court, ahmedabad against marketing services incorporated (hereinafter referred to as msi or defendant no.1), abu dhabi commercial bank ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the bank or defendant no.2) and falcon express lines incorporated (hereinafter referred to as feli or defendant no.3) praying for declaration that msi & feli have defrauded ael and the bank by concocting false documents and by mentioning false dates on the bill of lading and other documents and therefore, it is not entitled to get released any payment represented by l/c no.ilcu 100012 dated 9.5.2001 from the bank on the maturity date and restrain msi from .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 01 2005 (HC)

Kiritkumar K. Shroff Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Aug-01-2005

Reported in : (2005)199CTR(Guj)19; [2005]278ITR79(Guj)

d.a. mehta j.1. this petition challenges the order under section 18b of the wealth-tax act, 1957 ('the act'), passed by the respondent-commissioner of wealth-tax, surat, on january 27, 1993 (exhibit 'f').2. the petitioner, one of the executors of the estate of the late shri dalichand v. shroff, filed voluntary returns of wealth for the assessment years 1973-74 to 1976-77 on various dates which appear in the table set out hereunder. the petitioner paid wealth-tax payable under section 15b of the act at the time of filing of the returns. the wealth-tax officer passed assessment orders under section 16(3) of the act for all the years accepting the wealth returned by the petitioner. the following table gives the year-wise details :asst. wealth wealth tax paid tax payable on date of date of interest ifyear returned assessed alongwith assessment return assessment any, charged return after deduction by the wto (rs.) (rs.) (rs.) (rs.) (rs.)1973-74 404760 404760 3600 nil 1/5/79 24/9/79 nil1974-75 406746 406746 4070 nil 29/5/79 24/9/79 nil1975-76 437623 437623 4380 nil 29/5/79 24/9/79 nil1976-77 436977 436977 4370 nil 7/6/79 24/9/79 nil3. the petitioner filed an application seeking waiver of penalties levied/ leviable under section 18(1)(a) of the act for the years under consideration as well as subsequent assessment years. it was contended in the application that the petitioner had filed returns of wealth voluntarily and in good faith made full and true disclosure of net wealth before .....

Tag this Judgment!

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //