Mumbai Court July 1966 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Shivraj Fine Art Litho Works and anr. Vs. Authority Under the Minimum ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-13-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Bom223; (1966)68BOMLR933
ORDER(1) These two applications are filed as test cases against the orders of authority under he Minimum Wages Act, requiring the employer's Advocate to attach Court-fee stamp of Rs. 2 on his authorization before the authority. We are told there are a large number of matters pending before the authority against the very petitioners.(2) The short question is whether the authority under the Minimum Wages Act is a Civil court within the meaning of the word used in Article 12, Schedule II, Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959, which requires a stamp of Rs. 2 on a Vakalatnama or a Mukhtyarnama when presented to any Civil or Criminal Court other than High Court. or to any Revenue Court, or to any Collector, or Magistrate, or other executive officer. It is admitted that the Payment of Wages Authority, is neither a criminal Court nor a Revenue Court or an executive officer.(3) Section 20 of the Act enables the Government to appoint an authority before whom the claims arising under the Act could be purs...
Tarachand Gupta and Bros. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-08-1966
Reported in: (1971)73BOMLR558
Kotval, J.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal against the dismissal of their suit to recover a sum of Its. 45,100 from the Union of India represented by the Collector of Customs, Bombay. The suit came to be filed under the following circumstances.2. The plaintiffs are a partnership firm carrying on business in Bombay. On July 10, 1956 they obtained from the Controller of Imports a licence permitting them to import into India 'Motor Vehicle parts as per Appendix XXVI of J. D. 56 Red Book' the approximate value c.i.f. was stated as Rs. 46,449. The licence which is at exh. A specifically refers to three entries in the I.T.C. Schedule namely 293, 295 and 297-IV. The licence was valid upto July 31, 1957.3. Pursuant to this licence the plaintiffs imported goods into India in two consignments which arrived by two different ships s.s. 'Meerkerk' and the s.s. 'Jaladharti'. Both the consignments arrived in September 1957 and both the consignments each consisting of 17 cases were received. The two bi...
Dhondba Adku and anr. Vs. Civil Judge, Junior Division, Hinganghat and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-05-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Bom232; (1966)68BOMLR928
ORDER(1) These two petitions arise out of election to the Gram Panchayat.(2) In Special Civil Application No. 418 of 1966 the election to the Gram Panchayat of Taroda was held on November 29, 1965, the date of filing nomination papers being November 3, 1965. At this election the two petitioners got 90 and 85 votes respectively and respondents 2 and 3 got 73 and 72 votes respectively. They then made an election petition under section 15 of the Village Panchayats Act. challenging the election of the petitioners on several grounds one amongst them being that the voters' list was not in accordance with law, inasmuch as it contained, along with the names of persons in ward no. 3 for which the petitioners were elected, names of some persons who are residents in other wards, while some of the persons who are residents in ward no.3 were shown as voters in other wards. The other contentions need not be referred to as they do not affect the election.(3) The petitioners resisted the application. ...
Atmaram Sadashiv Dongarwar and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-05-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Bom452; (1967)69BOMLR256; 1967MhLJ201
Patel, J.(1) This petition is filed by expropriators and occupants of the agricultural lands within their Malguzari villages, seeking to challenge the orders issued by the respondents, calling upon them to execute the agreements under the Irrigation Act for supply of water to them out of a tank situate in Nawegaon.(2) The short facts leading to the present dispute may be stated. Petitioners 1 to 8 are the ex-proprietors of mouza Nawegaon and also probably other villages. Petitioners 9 to 20 are residents of different villages under malguzars. They were cultivating the lands, in what capacity it is not necessary for us to state in this petition. In Nawegaon ion Khasra NO. 883/1 there is a huge lake or reservoir of water covering about 3,200 acres of land. Out of this lake the malguzars, it is alleged, were entitled to take water for their crops including sugar-cane crop and the present cultivators were entitled to take water for paddy crops. One Sadasheo out of these w as entitled to ta...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›