Mumbai Court April 1963 Judgments
Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd. Vs. the Municipal Commissioner
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-15-1963
Reported in: (1963)65BOMLR742
Patel, J.1. The Turf Club holds a lease from the Corporation of the racing grounds at Mahalaxmi. The total yardage of the land comprised in the lease is 10,22,806 sq. yds. and the Club pays annual rent of Rs. 3,75,000 for the privilege of using the premises for the purpose of races and for other connected purposes. During the period that it is not required by the Club for racing purposes, under the terms of the lease the grounds have to be kept open for the use of the public for sports and games. The rating year in question in this appeal for which the Turf Club is assessed is 1954-55 and the assessment for that year is made on the basis of their accounts for the year 1953-54. The Assessment Committee fixed the gross rental value of the premises at Rs. 13,22,430-12-3 and net at Rs. 11,90,187-12-3 after allowing the statutory deduction of 10 per cent. under Section 154 and the Corporation called upon the Turf Club to pay the assessment on the basis of this rental value. The Turf Club ap...
Tag this Judgment!Vimlaben Khimji and ors. Vs. H.S. Manvikar and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-11-1963
Reported in: [1964]51ITR29(Bom)
1. This is a petition for challenging the validity of a prohibitory order issued by the Additional Collector of Bombay on 22nd November, 1961, under Order 21, rule 54, of the Code of Civil Procedure against the Hindu undivided family of Shri Khimji Devji. 2. One Khimji Devji died in Bombay on 29th January, 1959. The first petitioner is the widow of the said Khimji and the second, third and the fourth petitioners are the sons of the said petitioner. It is alleged that the said Khimji died leaving a will dated 1st February, 1958. Under this will, the first, second and the third petitioners are appointed executors and the petitioners are the sole beneficiaries thereunder. The Hindu undivided family consisting of the said Khimji and sons owned certain immovable properties. The said Khimji also derived income from businesses that were carried on in partnership in the name of Messrs. Teju Kaya and Company and other businesses in sub-partnership. From and after the assessment year 1935-36, th...
Tag this Judgment!Haribhau Govindrao and ors. Vs. Maharashtra State, Bombay and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-11-1963
Reported in: AIR1967Bom186; (1963)65BOMLR529; ILR1963Bom528
Kotval, J.(1) After the last general elections to the Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis, the Panchayat Samiti for Achalpur Taluq came to be constituted on 7-8-1962 for a period of five years. The petitioner Haribhau Govindrao Bobde was elected the Chairman of the Panchayat Samiti on that date. About two months later, on 9th of October 1962, four members of the Samiti gave notice of a no-confidence motion against the petitioner. That notice of the motion of no-confidence is at Annexure A, and the grounds annexed thereto, indicate that the members felt that the petitioner was misusing his powers and was not able to perform his duties. The Chairman, it appears, took no action upon this notice as prescribed by sub-section (2) of S. 72 of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961. By that sub-section, he was bound to convene a meeting of the Panchayat Samiti to consider such motion within ten days of the receipt of the notice. In this petition he states that the me...
Tag this Judgment!Ramkrishna Ramnath and anr. Vs. the State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-10-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Bom51; (1963)65BOMLR726; [1963(7)FLR373]; ILR1963Bom672; (1963)IILLJ548Bom
Kotval, J.1. In this petition there Is Challenged a notification No. M.W.A. 1557-J, dated the 11th June 1958 issued under Section 5 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (No. 11 of 1948), by the then Government of Bombay. The notification is at annexure D and it has had an unenviable record of litigation arising from it. The notification was as follows :'No. M.W.A. 1557-J. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (2) of Section 5 read with clause (b) of Sub-section (1) of that section of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 til of 1948), and after consulting the Advisory Board and in supersession of the former Government of Madhya Pradesh Labour Department Notification No. 584-451-XXIII, dated the 23rd February 1956, the Government of Bombay hereby revise the minimum rates of wages in respect of the employment in any tobacco (including bidi making) manufactory in the Vidarbha region of the State of Bombay as mentioned in the Schedule hereto annexed and directs that this notification shall co...
Tag this Judgment!Ramkrishna Ramnath Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-10-1963
Reported in: 1963MhLJ793
Kotval, J.1. In this petition there is challenged a notification No. MWA. 1557-J, dated 11 June, 1958, issued under S. 5 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (XI of 1948), by the then Government of Bombay. The notification is at annexure D and it has had an unenviable record of litigation arising from it. The notification was as follows : 'No. MWA. 1557-J - In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (2) of S. 5 read with Clause (b) of Sub-section (1) of that section of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (IX of 1948), and after consulting the advisory board and in supersession of the former Government of Madhya Pradesh Labour Department Notification No. 564-451-XXIII, dated 23 February, 1956, the Government of Bombay hereby revise the minimum rates of wages in respect of the employment in any tobacco (including bidi-making) manufactory in the Vidarbha region of the State of Bombay as mentioned in the schedule hereto annexed and directs that this notification shall come into force with effect...
Tag this Judgment!Ramkishore Pandit Vs. Vijayabahadursingh Jagtapsingh
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-09-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Bom85; (1963)65BOMLR712; ILR1964Bom202
Patel, J.1. This is an appeal from Order refusing to grant art injunction in favour of the plaintiff applicant. The short facts are that the defendant is an employee of the Century Mills Ltd., and as such employee he is in occupation of the room in dispute belonging to the century MILLS. In or about August of 1958, the defendant allowed the plaintiff to stay with him, as he says, to facilitate medical treatment of his ailing wife. The plaintiff, however, thereafter started asserting his sub-tenancy in respect of the room which jeopardized defendant's own tenancy with the Century Mills. The defendant thereupon commenced proceedings under Section 41 of tin Presidency Small cause Courts Act, in February 1960. The plaintiff filed his statement of defence on the 29th April 1960. On 7th August 1962, when the case reached hearing the parties obtained a consent order as follows;'The defendant to vacate in four months. No order as to costs. The defendant will be at liberty to file a suit for de...
Tag this Judgment!The Bombay Municipal Corporation Vs. Motichand Hirachand
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-09-1963
Reported in: (1963)65BOMLR718; 1963MhLJ917
Patel, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 217 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act III of 1888 which we will hereafter call 'the Act'. The respondents own a building at the corner of what was known as Marine Drive and Sandhurst Bridge. The whole of the building is tenanted and till 1956-57 the Municipal Corporation was assessing the annual rateable value at the actual rent realised from the tenants for the purposes of municipal taxes. On February 5, 1957, the owners entered into an agreement with the Tata Locomotive and Engineering Co. Ltd. which entitled that company to instal, maintain and display a neon sign on the clock tower of the building and one other sign for the purposes of advertisement in respect of Tata-Mercedes-Benz Automobile trucks and buses. This was done with the sanction of the Bombay Municipal Corporation and also that of the Commissioner of Police. Under this agreement, the owners became entitled to a sum of Rs. 800 for the actual occupation of a portion of th...
Tag this Judgment!Pesumal Dhanmal Vs. New Asiatic Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Bom121; (1963)65BOMLR705; ILR1964Bom194
Patel, J.1. These two appeals Nos. 10 and 11 of 1962, arise out of two suits Nos. 70 and 71 of 1959 filed by the nears of one Daooji Radhamohan Meherotra and by one Murli Dholandas respectively for damages in respect of a car accident which resulted in the death of Daooji and serious injury to Murli while the car was Winy driven by the defendant Pesumal.2. The short facts are that both the deceased Meherotra and Murli Dholandas accompanied the defendant on 13th March 1958 on a motor drive front Bombay to Poona by a motor ear belonging to one Shamdas Narnumal Asvani. The defendant was in charge of the car and he was driving it with the consent and knowledge of Shamdas Narnumal Asvani. The plaintiffs allege that he was driving it rashly and negligently and while doing so, between Mile stones 93 and 94 there was a collision between the car and motor truck bearing No. BYT 2216 as a result of which Meherotra died and Murli Dholandas stitfered severe injuries. The heirs of Meherctra, and the...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Bombay City Vs. Indian Standard Metal Comp ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-1963
Reported in: [1963]49ITR832(Bom)
V.S. Desai, J.1. This is a reference under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act and the question which is referred thereunder is as follows : 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to claim deduction on account of accumulated depreciation allowance in its fixed assets, not written off in the books but allowed by the Department in the income-tax assessments for the purpose of computing the net wealth under section 7 of the Wealth-tax Act for the assessment year 1957-58 ?' 2. The assessee is a limited company and we are concerned in the present case with the assessment year 1957-58, for which the relevant valuation date is the 31st December, 1956. The assessee in the return which it submitted, gave the net value of its assets allowing for the depreciation in their value. In this return, it appears, the book value was given of the assets. After the return was submitted, there was correspondence entered into between the Wealth-tax Officer and t...
Tag this Judgment!Chellaram Kishandas Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-05-1963
Reported in: [1964]15STC545(Bom)
Tambe, J.1. This is a reference under sub-section (1) of section 34 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). We are here concerned with the period 1st April, 1954, to 31st March, 1955. During this period the applicant Chellaram Kishandas submitted certain tenders to the Regional Director of Food, Government of India, for purchase of sugar, which, at the material time, Government of India was supplying to the traders on a quota basis. The applicant's tenders were accepted, and a certain quota of sugar was allotted to the applicant, and was in due course purchased by the applicant during the aforesaid period. On or about the 15th June, 1957, the Sales Tax Officer, Enforcement Branch, issued a notice under sub-section (6) of section 14, calling upon the applicant to show cause why he should not be assessed to tax under the Act in respect of the aforesaid transactions of purchase of sugar. It appears that various contentions were raised by the applicant befor...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »