Created byFuzzy Cloud| Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
71 judgments delivered by benches including this judge.
M/s Kalp Enterprise, represented by its proprietor Shri Bhaveshbhai Amrutlal Taraviya, filed a special civil writ petition before the Gujarat High Court. The petitioner sought the Court's permission to withdraw the writ petition in order to pursue an appeal before the appropriate Appellate Authority. The respondents, t…
Petitioner Touquire Azad Siddiquie filed a writ petition before the Gujarat High Court. The petitioner, through Senior Advocate Tushar Hemani and counsel Ms. Vaibhavi K. Parikh, sought the Court's permission to withdraw the petition on the ground that the passage of time had rendered the matter infructuous. The respond…
The petitioner, a former General Reserve Engineer Force (GREF) employee, resigned and later joined the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF). Despite receiving a discharge certificate from GREF, he was later charged for serving in CRPF without a formal resignation and was removed from service. The petitioner appealed the…
Petitioner Sanjay Jayant Desai filed a special civil application seeking a writ against the Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Surat. The petitioner, through counsel Mr. Ashutosh S. Dave, requested the court's permission to withdraw the writ petition so that an application could be file…
The petitioner, Amita Sanjay Desai, filed a special civil application seeking a writ against the Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3, Surat. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Ashutosh S. Dave, requested permission to withdraw the writ petition so that an application could be filed before th…
Sandesh Procon LLP filed a special civil writ application before the Gujarat High Court challenging an order of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(3), Ahmedabad. The petition was heard before a two‑judge bench, but the judges were unable to deliver a judgment due to paucity of time. Consequently, the co…
The petitioner, a civil engineer and registered valuer for non‑agricultural immovable property, applied for registration as a valuer of agricultural lands under Section 34AB of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, but his application was rejected because he did not possess a degree in Agricultural Science as required by Rule 8A(3…
Mahalaxmi Industries filed a writ petition challenging an Order‑in‑Original dated 23‑03‑2026 of the Assistant Commissioner of Central GST, which confirmed a demand of Rs 1,46,76,034 under Section 74 of the CGST Act for allegedly availing ineligible input tax credit (ITC) on fake invoices from non‑existent Delhi firms. …
Lanxess Belgium N.V., a Belgian manufacturer of sulfenamide accelerators, challenged the anti-dumping final findings and notification issued by the Designated Authority (Respondent No.2) on the ground that the investigation was initiated without the mandatory pre‑initiation scrutiny and that the computation of dumping …
The High Court of Gujarat heard Special Civil Applications No. 23028/2019 and No. 23029/2019 filed by Shakti Sales Corporation against the State of Gujarat. The applications were heard finally, but because of paucity of time the judgment could not be delivered. The Court ordered that the matters be re‑heard. Consequent…
The High Court of Gujarat heard Special Civil Applications No. 23028/2019 and No. 23029/2019 filed by Shakti Sales Corporation against the State of Gujarat. The applications were heard finally, but because of paucity of time the judgment could not be delivered. The Court ordered that the matters be re‑heard. Consequent…
Datta Projects Private Limited filed a Special Civil Application before the Gujarat High Court challenging the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Vapi Circle. The matter was heard before a two‑Judge Bench, but the judges were unable to deliver a judgment due to lack of time. Consequently, the court orde…
The petitioners, Rajhans Metals Private Limited and another, filed a Special Civil Application before the Gujarat High Court against the Union of India and others. The petitioners were represented by Senior Advocate Mr. Mihir H. Joshi. The respondents were represented by Mr. D.N. Patel and Ms. Amee Yajnik, with Mr. Dha…
The High Court of Gujarat heard a special civil application filed by Kitchen Xpress Overseas Ltd. against the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle‑2. The matter was heard but, due to lack of time, the judges could not deliver a judgment. Consequently, the court ordered that the matter be released and notified befo…
The petitioners, partners of M/s. Maa Renuka Trading, were penalised under Sections 122(1A) and 122(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for allegedly generating fake invoices, e‑way bills and routing funds through hawala to fraudulently claim input tax credit. They filed a writ petition under Article 226…
M/s. F.S. Textiles filed a special civil application seeking permission to withdraw its pending writ petition and to file two separate petitions in respect of the impugned orders. The petitioner, through counsel Mr. Avinash Poddar, argued that a single petition was no longer appropriate and requested the court's leave …
The petitioner, GORDHANBHAI DEVJIBHAI KAPADIA, challenged a notice issued under section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2013‑14‑2017‑18 and the subsequent order under section 148A(d). The High Court examined the applicability of the Supreme Court’s decisions in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal and Union of India…
Mohib Nomanbhai Khericha filed a Special Civil Application (writ petition) before the Gujarat High Court against the Income Tax Officer, Circle 1, seeking relief. The petitioner later approached the Court for permission to withdraw the writ petition in order to pursue an alternative remedy. The Court considered whether…
The accused, Ravi @Morari Keshabhai Matang and others, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with an FIR alleging offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Gujarat Police Act. Their earlier anticipatory bail application was rejected…
The applicants sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with an FIR alleging they piloted a truck carrying prohibited liquor, violating several provisions of the Prohibition Act. The prosecution opposed bail, citing the nature of the offences and the applicants…
Shiva @ Shivo @ Sultan Hirabhai Shrivastav filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking temporary bail. Counsel for the applicant, Mr. Alpesh R. Reddy, informed the court that the applicant no longer wishes to pursue the bail application and requested permission to withdraw it. The respondent, represented by Ms. …
The petitioners, Kanubhai Popatbhai Masani and others, filed a miscellaneous civil application seeking restoration of Special Civil Application No. 5097 of 2024, which had been dismissed for non‑prosecution. The respondents, the State of Gujarat and others, opposed the restoration. The petitioners argued that there was…
The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous application under the Domestic Violence Act seeking relief. The parties subsequently reached a settlement outside court. The petitioners, through counsel, applied to the High Court for permission to withdraw the application. The Court considered whether such withdrawal cou…
Petitioners Mukeshchandra Narbheram Chadarwala & Anr filed a Special Civil Application seeking permission to withdraw the petition so that they could challenge a remand order dated 24‑12‑2009 passed by the Deputy Collector, Bharuch. The petitioners, represented by Mr. Satyam Chhaya and Ms. Poonam M. Maheta, requested t…
Petitioner Mukeshchandra Narbheram Chadarwala and another filed a Special Civil Application seeking permission to withdraw the petition so that they could challenge a remand order dated 24-12-2009 passed by the Deputy Collector, Bharuch. The petitioners argued that withdrawal was necessary to pursue the challenge in a …
The petitioner, Arjanbhai Nanjibhai Virani (Patel), filed a special civil application seeking a writ of mandamus directing the State of Gujarat and other respondents to verify and re‑measure his land (Survey No. 415/3, village Mavdi) using the 1962 Tippan and historical records and to correct the revenue entries to ref…
The State of Gujarat appealed the acquittal of Rajeshkumar Kantilal Patel and co‑accused for offences arising from a communal riot on 28 February 2002, where a mob allegedly torched houses and a mosque and caused a death. The Sessions Court had acquitted the accused, finding the prosecution evidence unreliable. On appe…
The petitioners filed a Special Civil Application seeking a court direction for the respondent to decide a representation dated 31‑12‑2024 that remained pending with respondent No.2. The petitioner urged that the representation be decided within the stipulated time, while the respondent agreed that any pending represen…
The petitioners Chaudhry Parth Natubhai & Anr. filed a Special Civil Application (No. 33227 of 2025) which was dismissed for default due to non‑removal of office objections. They subsequently filed a Miscellaneous Civil Application (No. 395 of 2026) seeking restoration of the dismissed petition. The learned counsel for…
Petitioner Mukesh Dalpatbhai Parmar filed a Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking to compel Respondent No.4, a State authority, to record a lis‑pendens entry (serial no. 12038 of 2024) in the revenue records of Hinglot village, Vadodara. Respondent No.4 refused, relying on a Gujarat go…
The State of Gujarat appealed against a conviction of Jagdishbhai Haribhai Kagadada. During the hearing, statements from the deceased's daughter and son‑in‑law were recorded, confirming that the accused had died in 2006, well before the 20‑year limitation period for criminal appeals. No record of the death existed with…
The State appealed the acquittal of five accused in a murder case under Sections 302, 114, 323 IPC and Section 135 Bombay Police Act, alleging that the trial court erred in finding the evidence insufficient. The prosecution relied on the ocular testimony of three close relatives, forensic recovery of a weapon and blood…
The State of Gujarat appealed against a conviction of Jagdishbhai Haribhai Kagadada. During the hearing, statements from the deceased's daughter and son‑in‑law were recorded, confirming that the accused had died in 2006, well before the 20‑year limitation period for criminal appeals. No record of the death existed with…
The State of Gujarat appealed against a conviction of Jagdishbhai Haribhai Kagadada. During the hearing, statements from the deceased's daughter and son‑in‑law were recorded, confirming that the accused had died in 2006, well before the 20‑year limitation period for criminal appeals. No record of the death existed with…
Petitioners KER ISHAK OSMAN & Anr filed a Special Civil Application seeking permission to withdraw the petition and retain the liberty to approach a competent forum. The petitioners requested that the court allow withdrawal so that they could pursue a statutory appeal against an order dated 14-10-2025 passed by the Ass…
The petitioners, five of twenty‑three parties, challenged a notice dated 23‑01‑2026 issued under Section 61 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879, which ordered them to vacate premises within seven days without granting any hearing. The respondent authority admitted the factual correctness of the notice but argued no …
The petitioner, Salim Rahimbhai Shaikh, challenged an order dated 06.01.2026 issued by the City Survey Superintendent under Section 61 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879, which directed removal of an alleged encroachment within one week. He contended that a notice under Section 202 of the same Code had been served …
The petitioner, Salim Rahimbhai Shaikh, challenged an order dated 06.01.2026 issued by the City Survey Superintendent under Section 61 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879, which directed removal of an alleged encroachment within one week. He contended that a notice under Section 202 of the same Code had been served …
The petitioner, Wajidkhan Sarafatkhan Pathan, filed a petition to quash an order dated 06.01.2026 issued under Section 61 of the Land Revenue Code, 1879, which directed removal of an encroachment within a week. He contended that a notice under Section 202 of the same Code had been issued on 17.12.2025, i.e., before the…
Naderali Rajjabhai Usisawla filed a petition seeking to quash an order dated 06‑01‑2026 issued by the City Survey Superintendent, Vadodara under Section 61 of the Land Revenue Code, 1879, which directed removal of an encroachment within a week. The petitioner contended that a notice under Section 202 of the same Code h…
Naderali Rajjabhai Usisawla filed a petition seeking to quash an order dated 06‑01‑2026 issued by the City Survey Superintendent, Vadodara under Section 61 of the Land Revenue Code, 1879, which directed removal of an encroachment within a week. The petitioner contended that a notice under Section 202 of the same Code h…
Naderali Rajjabhai Usisawla filed a petition seeking to quash an order dated 06‑01‑2026 issued by the City Survey Superintendent, Vadodara under Section 61 of the Land Revenue Code, 1879, which directed removal of an encroachment within a week. The petitioner contended that a notice under Section 202 of the same Code h…
The petitioner, Salim Rahimbhai Shaikh, challenged an order dated 06.01.2026 issued by the City Survey Superintendent under Section 61 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879, which directed removal of an alleged encroachment within one week. He contended that a notice under Section 202 of the same Code had been served …
Naderali Rajjabhai Usisawla filed a petition seeking to quash an order dated 06‑01‑2026 issued by the City Survey Superintendent, Vadodara under Section 61 of the Land Revenue Code, 1879, which directed removal of an encroachment within a week. The petitioner contended that a notice under Section 202 of the same Code h…
The petitioner, Wajidkhan Sarafatkhan Pathan, filed a petition to quash an order dated 06.01.2026 issued under Section 61 of the Land Revenue Code, 1879, which directed removal of an encroachment within a week. He contended that a notice under Section 202 of the same Code had been issued on 17.12.2025, i.e., before the…
The petitioner, Imtyajali Memoodali Diwan, filed a special civil application seeking to quash an order dated 06.01.2026 issued under Section 61 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code directing removal of an encroachment, and a prior notice dated 06.12.2025 issued under Section 202 of the same Code. The petitioner argued that…
The petitioner, Rahimbhai Tinwala, challenged an order dated 06‑01‑2026 issued by the City Survey Superintendent under Section 61 of the Land Revenue Code, 1879 directing removal of an alleged encroachment within one week. He contended that a notice under Section 202 of the same Code had been issued on 17‑12‑2025, i.e.…
The petitioner, Wajidkhan Sarafatkhan Pathan, filed a petition to quash an order dated 06.01.2026 issued under Section 61 of the Land Revenue Code, 1879, which directed removal of an encroachment within a week. He contended that a notice under Section 202 of the same Code had been issued on 17.12.2025, i.e., before the…
The petitioner, Wajidkhan Sarafatkhan Pathan, filed a petition to quash an order dated 06.01.2026 issued under Section 61 of the Land Revenue Code, 1879, which directed removal of an encroachment within a week. He contended that a notice under Section 202 of the same Code had been issued on 17.12.2025, i.e., before the…
The petitioner, Wajidkhan Sarafatkhan Pathan, filed a petition to quash an order dated 06.01.2026 issued under Section 61 of the Land Revenue Code, 1879, which directed removal of an encroachment within a week. He contended that a notice under Section 202 of the same Code had been issued on 17.12.2025, i.e., before the…
The petitioner, Salim Rahimbhai Shaikh, challenged an order dated 06.01.2026 issued by the City Survey Superintendent under Section 61 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879, which directed removal of an alleged encroachment within one week. He contended that a notice under Section 202 of the same Code had been served …
The petitioners challenged a notice dated 19‑January‑2026 issued by the Mamlatdar and Executive Magistrate ordering the removal of alleged illegal construction within two days, alleging it was issued without prior intimation and without citing any legal provision. The notice claimed the construction violated a 40‑metre…
The petitioner, a lawful occupier of land in Talala Taluka, challenged the sealing of his premises by revenue officers on 11‑December‑2025. The sealing was carried out after a status‑quo order dated 31‑July‑2024 was not extended, despite a pending demolition order dated 26‑April‑2021 under Section 66 of the Gujarat Lan…
The petitioners, Jagmalbhai Minabhai Sindhva and others, approached the Gujarat High Court alleging that the State authorities were proceeding with demolition of their premises without any legal notice. The petitioners sought relief, invoking the Supreme Court's mandate in Writ Petition (Civil) 295 of 2022, and emphasi…
The petitioners alleged that the State authorities were proceeding to demolish premises in their possession without issuing any statutory notice. The petitioners sought relief to restrain the demolition and to compel the authorities to act in accordance with the Supreme Court's mandate in Writ Petition (Civil) 295 of 2…
The petitioners alleged that the State authorities were proceeding to demolish premises in their possession without issuing any statutory notice. The petitioners sought relief, invoking the Supreme Court's mandate in Writ Petition (Civil) 295 of 2022 and the principles of natural justice. The respondent, represented by…
The petitioners alleged that the State authorities were proceeding to demolish premises in their possession without issuing any statutory notice. The petitioners sought relief, invoking the Supreme Court's mandate in Writ Petition (Civil) 295 of 2022 and the principles of natural justice. The respondent, represented by…
The petitioners alleged that the State authorities were proceeding to demolish premises in their possession without issuing any statutory notice. The petitioners sought relief to restrain the demolition and to compel the authorities to act in accordance with the Supreme Court's mandate in Writ Petition (Civil) 295 of 2…
The petitioners alleged that the State authorities were proceeding to demolish premises in their possession without issuing any statutory notice. The petitioners sought relief to restrain the demolition and to compel the authorities to act in accordance with the Supreme Court's mandate in Writ Petition (Civil) 295 of 2…
The petitioners alleged that the State authorities were proceeding to demolish premises in their possession without issuing any statutory notice. The petitioners sought relief to restrain the demolition and to compel the authorities to act in accordance with the Supreme Court's mandate in Writ Petition (Civil) 295 of 2…
The petitioners alleged that the State authorities were proceeding to demolish premises in their possession without issuing any statutory notice. The petitioners sought relief to restrain the demolition and to compel the authorities to act in accordance with the Supreme Court's mandate in Writ Petition (Civil) 295 of 2…
The petitioners alleged that the State authorities were proceeding to demolish premises in their possession without issuing any statutory notice. The petitioners sought relief to restrain the demolition and to compel the authorities to act in accordance with the Supreme Court's mandate in Writ Petition (Civil) 295 of 2…
The petitioners alleged that the State authorities were proceeding to demolish premises in their possession without issuing any statutory notice. The petitioners sought relief, invoking the Supreme Court's mandate in Writ Petition (Civil) 295 of 2022 and the principles of natural justice. The respondent, represented by…
The petitioners alleged that the State authorities were proceeding to demolish premises in their possession without issuing any statutory notice. The petitioners sought relief to restrain the demolition and to compel the authorities to act in accordance with the Supreme Court's mandate in Writ Petition (Civil) 295 of 2…
The petitioners alleged that the State authorities were proceeding to demolish premises in their possession without issuing any statutory notice. The petitioners sought relief to restrain the demolition and to compel the authorities to act in accordance with the Supreme Court's mandate in Writ Petition (Civil) 295 of 2…
The petitioners alleged that the State authorities were proceeding to demolish premises in their possession without issuing any statutory notice. The petitioners sought relief to restrain the demolition and to compel the authorities to act in accordance with the Supreme Court's mandate in Writ Petition (Civil) 295 of 2…
The petitioners alleged that the State authorities were proceeding to demolish premises in their possession without issuing any statutory notice. The petitioners sought relief, invoking the Supreme Court's mandate in Writ Petition (Civil) 295 of 2022 and the principles of natural justice. The respondent, represented by…
The petitioners alleged that the State authorities were proceeding to demolish premises in their possession without issuing any statutory notice. The petitioners sought relief to restrain the demolition and to compel the authorities to act in accordance with the Supreme Court's mandate in Writ Petition (Civil) 295 of 2…
The petitioners alleged that the State authorities were proceeding to demolish premises in their possession without issuing any statutory notice. The petitioners sought relief, invoking the Supreme Court's mandate in Writ Petition (Civil) 295 of 2022 and the principles of natural justice. The respondent, represented by…
The petitioners alleged that the State authorities were proceeding to demolish premises in their possession without issuing any statutory notice. The petitioners sought relief, invoking the Supreme Court's mandate in Writ Petition (Civil) 295 of 2022 and the principles of natural justice. The respondent, represented by…
The petitioners, heirs of Kalusing Pratapsinh Parmar, filed a miscellaneous civil application seeking restoration of Special Civil Application No.1458 of 2025, which had been dismissed for default due to lack of prosecution. The respondents opposed the restoration. The court examined the averments made in the restorati…
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
