Advanced Search Results

Uniferro International Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Judge : S.C. Pratap, J.

Subject : Civil

Reported in : 1988(16)LC257(Bombay)

ORDERS.C. Pratap, J.1. This petition is filed at the stage of show cause notice. It is difficult to entertain petitions at this stage when proceedings in pursuant to show cause notice are yet to be heard...

Gemini Colors Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Ishkumar Narayandas Khurana Vs. the U ...

Court : Mumbai

Judge : S.C. Pratap, J.

Subject : Customs

Reported in : 1988(16)LC121(Bombay)

ORDERS.C. Pratap, J.1. The Deputy Collector of Customs has, after inspection of the goods and after hearing the petitioners, made his order on 5th January 1988 with reasons in support thereof. He has also indicated the...

Shreeniwas Cotton Mills Ltd. and Another Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Mumbai

Judge : S.C. Pratap, J.

Subject : Excise

Reported in : 1983LC133D(Bombay); 1981(8)ELT867(Bom)

S.C. Pratap, J.1. Facts and circumstances in these two petitions as also the dispute between the parties in these two petitions are in effect and substance virtually the same as the facts and circumstances in and...

Nemichand Sasmal and ors. Vs. JainuddIn Allihusien and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Judge : S.C. Pratap, J.

Subject : Tenancy

Acts : Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Sections 105; Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 - Sections 23A; Bombay Rent Act

Reported in : AIR1986Bom369; 1986(1)BomCR488; (1986)88BOMLR149; 1986MhLJ929

ORDER1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution has been filed by the plaintiffs against concurrent judgments and decrees passed by the two Courts below dismissing their suit as also their appeal therefrom.2. Hearing rival...

A.Z. Industries Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Judge : S.C. Pratap, J.

Subject : Customs

Reported in : 1988(16)LC124(Bombay)

ORDERS.C. Pratap, J.1. There is no dispute that against the impugned order dated 23rd October, 1987 at Exhibit N an appeal lies to the Collector of Customs (Appeals) Bombay. If so, I see no good and...

Vishwanath Mahalu Gondhali and Another Vs. Ramanlal Deoram Tamboli and ...

Court : Mumbai

Judge : S.C. Pratap, J.

Subject : Company

Acts : Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 - Sections 92A, 92B and 110A

Reported in : (1986)88BOMLR515; [1987]62CompCas510(Bom)

S.C. Pratap, J.1. This is the original claimants' - parents of the victim - revision against rejection by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred 'the Tribunal') of their application for payment of compensation on no...

Gannon Dunkerley and Co. Ltd. and Another Vs. Central Board of Direct ...

Court : Mumbai

Judge : S.C. Pratap, J.

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 80-O

Reported in : (1986)53CTR(Bom)1; [1986]159ITR162(Bom); [1986]24TAXMAN460(Bom)

Pratap, J.1. The central issue in this petition in this petition relates to the interpretation of section 80-O of the Income-Tax Act, 1961.2. The 1st petitioner is a public limited company (hereinafter 'the company'), petitioner No....

Dinesh Brothers and Co. Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Cci and E and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Judge : S.C. Pratap, J.

Subject : Customs

Reported in : 1992(39)LC322(Bombay)

S.C. Pratap, J.1. On the main dispute and the merits, the relevant facts and circumstances in this petition are similar to the relevant facts and circumstances in Writ Petition No. 2477 of 1984 decided on 19ih/20ih...

Ratilal Tribhovandas and Sons Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Chief Controll ...

Court : Mumbai

Judge : S.C. Pratap, J.

Subject : Customs

Reported in : 1992(39)LC324(Bombay)

S.C. Pratap, J.1. On the main dispute and the merits, the relevant facts and circumstances in this petition are similar to the relevant facts and circumstances in Writ Petition No. 2477 of 1984 decided on 19th/20th...

Tide Water Detergent Co. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Judge : S.C. Pratap, J.

Subject : Excise

Reported in : 1992(40)LC530(Bombay)

S.C. Pratap, J.1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service.2. This petition challenges the legality and validity of two orders both dated 23rd October 1989, part of Exhibits E & F respectively. Turning to these two orders,...