Mumbai Court March 1967 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.
Laxmibai Laxmichand Shah Vs. Laxmichand Ravaji Shah
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Bom332; (1968)70BOMLR80; [1969]72ITR157(Bom); 1968MhLJ338
(1) This is an appeal by the wife against the judgment of the City Civil Court Bombay allowing the judgment of the City Civil Court Bombay allowing her husband's petition for divorce on the ground that there was no restitution of conjugal rights between them for a period of two years and more after the decree for restitution of conjugal rights was passed in her favour. The appeal raises an important question of law on which I gather conflicting judgments have been delivered by two learned Judges of the City Civil Court. (2) It is necessary to state but a few facts for an appreciation of the question which arises in the appeal. The parties were married on the 8th of February 1945 and on the 27th of April 1959 the wife obtained a decree for restitution of conjugal rights in a proceeding instituted by her for that relief. On the 8th of February 1965, the husband initiated the present proceedings for dissolution of the marriage by a decree of divorce on the ground that the decree for resti...
Krishna Rajaram Wani Vs. M.V. Koranne and
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-28-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Bom247; (1967)69BOMLR651; ILR1967Bom1156; 1967MhLJ964
(1) This is an application in revision from the Judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Dhulia, confirming the order of conviction of the petitioner passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Dhulia under section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954.(2) The material facts are as follows:-The petitioner (who would hereafter be referred to as the accused) is a dealer in food grains. On 29th March 1965, Koranne, the accused was dealing in adulterated food grains, went to the shop of the accused and purchased Bajari weighing one Kilogram. He divided the sample purchased by in three parts, and sent one packet to the Public Analyst for analysis. The report of the Analyst was received in due course. It stated that ergot was found on chemical test. It further stated that the test for acidity (soreness) was negative. The report was written on Form-III. Rule 7 (3). In the certificate with which the report begins, the Analyst stated that sample of Bajari sent for a...
Ambika Tobacco Company, Gondia Vs. Labour Court, Nagpur and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-17-1967
Reported in: (1968)70BOMLR159; [1968(17)FLR105]; (1968)IILLJ353Bom; 1968MhLJ10
Abhyankar, J. 1. The petitioner-company deals in bidis. It supplied raw material to independent contractors and obtained katcha bidis prepared and rolled by workers employed by such independent contractors. Respondents 2 to 48 who are 47 in number, collectively, on the other hand, claim to be employees for bidi-rolling work, employed by the petitioner-company. These several respondents filed an application before respondent 1, which is a labour court at Nagpur, complaining that they had not been paid at the minimum rate of wages fixed by the State Government for workers in bidi industry, under a notification dated 14 June, 1958, which came into force from 1 July, 1958. The respondent-workers claimed the difference between the wages actually paid and the wages payable at the minimum rate of wages fixed under the Minimum Wages Act by the State Government for the period from 1 May, 1959 to 15 December, 1961. The applications were filed on or about 10 April, 1964. 2. The petitioner-company...
indradeo A. Deshmukh Vs. Manohar (N.Y.) and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-15-1967
Reported in: (1967)ILLJ811Bom
1. The short question raised by this petition relates to the matter of absorption and fixation of seniority of employees who were directly recruited and appointed in the grain shop department of the Central Railway, to which category of recruits the petitioner belongs. The impugned orders or directives of the Railway Board are dated 2 November, 1957 and 13 January, 1961 whereby a distinction has been made in the aforesaid matters of absorption and fixation of seniority between (1) temporary staff who were appointed in the permanent departments initially and then transferred to the grain shop department, (2) temporary staff recruited for a permanent department but appointed to the grain shop department (through the Staff Selection Board or Joint Selection Board) on the one hand, and (3) temporary staff recruited and appointed directly to the grain shop department on the other, to the last category of which the petitioner belongs, and the effect of the two impugned orders or directives h...
Waman Sambhaji Duka Vs. Narhari Sambhajirao Phatale
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-14-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Bom124; (1967)69BOMLR687; 1968CriLJ305; ILR1967Bom1147
(1) This is a revision application by the accused who is being prosecuted under sections 406, 467 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused had made an application before the Judicial Magistrate (First Class) at Parenda. The accused is an officer of the Co-operative Societies and the offences which are alleged against him are supposed to have been committed by him during the course of his duty as an officer of the Co-operative Society. He, therefore, requested the learned Magistrate to dispose of the case as either not maintainable or to stay the proceedings until a valid sanction has been obtained under the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The learned Magistrate rejected the application relying upon the earlier judgment of this Court and directed that the prosecution shall proceed. Being aggrieved, this revision application has been filed by the accused.(2) On behalf of the accused reliance has been placed upon the provisions of section 146 and secti...
A.R. Mahadevia Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-07-1967
Reported in: [1967]65ITR308(Bom)
V.S. Desai, J.1. This reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, arises out of the assessee's assessment for the assessment year 1958-59, the relevant accounting year being the financial year ending on the 31st March, 1958. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family. It has income from property, business in shares both ready and forward, dividends and shares of profit from the registered firm of Mahadevia Brothers. For the assessment year 1958-59 the assessee's income from business was assessed in the sum of Rs. 47,987. In the said assessment year the assessee had incurred a loss of Rs. 2,29,597 in its speculative business. The assessee claimed to set off the said loss against its profits from the non-speculative business. The claim was disallowed by the profits from the non-speculative business The claim was disallowed by the Income-tax Officer relying on the first proviso to section 24(1) read along with the Explanations to the said proviso. It was contended by t...
Kevalchand Nemchand Mehta Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Bo ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-07-1967
Reported in: [1968]67ITR804(Bom)
Kotval, C.J.1. The real question that falls to be determined in this case is whether the assessee is entitled to claim a deduction in respect of an amount of Rs. 26,197 being the interest charged by the firm, Kapurchand & Co, of which he was a partner and debited in his account with the firm. We shall presently show how the question actually referred does not reflect the real controversy between the parties. 2. The assessee, Kevalchand Nemchand Mehta, is a partner of the firm of Messrs. Kapurchand & Co. He, in his individual capacity, had a income from house properties, dividends and interest. He also had a personal account with the firm, Kapurchand & Co., in which his income from the firm used to be credited and his withdrawals for personal and other expenses used to be debited. The Samvat year 2012 of this account commenced with a credit balance of Rs. 2,07,119-6-10. Then he made several withdrawals including payments for his own personal expenses. We are not concerned with these ite...
Rai Saheb Rekchand Mohota Spinning and Weaving Mills (Private), Ltd. V ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-07-1967
Reported in: [1967(15)FLR322]; (1968)ILLJ610Bom; 1967MhLJ864
L. M. Paranjpe, J. 1. In this petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner, which is a limited company, has prayed for a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the labour court whereby it was directed to pay lay-off compensation to the respondent's workmen. 2. The petitioner-company owns and runs a textile mill at Hinganghat, district Wardha. Respondent 2 to 99 were employees of the petitioner-mill and were working in the third shift of the mill during the relevant period. The Maharashtra State Electricity Board intimated to the mill its inability to supply electric current between 8 and 9 p.m. during a certain period and requested the petitioner mill to extent the half an hour's recess of the second shift by making it for one hour from 8 p.m. to 9 p.m. The petitioner had, therefore, to extend the second shift from midnight up to 12-30 a.m. and to shift the starting of the third shift from midnight to 12-30 a.m. for the period from 5 to 13 August, 1964. Accord...
Narayandas S. Kanuga Vs. Sarasvatibai D. Joshi and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-07-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Bom280; (1967)69BOMLR622; 1967MhLJ946
(1) There is a rectangular plot of land abutted on two sides by road-on the south by B. J. Road and on the east Gram Panchayat Road. It measures 1895 Sq. Yards. Small plots of land, thirteen in number, were given to various persons by the owner who have built small shops of about nine feet high and they have been running the shops. The owner says they are licensees while the occupants say they are tenants. The Municipal Corporation and the owner say that the constructions are unauthorised and the former has issued notice for demolition. The owner wants to develop the plot and wants to build a multi-storeyed building. She offered the occupants accommodation in the building but they are not satisfied with what was offered and she had to file suits in Small Cause Court for eviction which are pending.(2) In the meantime she got the plans sanctioned on June 19, 1965. She had collected funds and materials ready. But as the occupants of the shops refused to vacate, to save time she approached...
Rai Saheb Rekchand Mohota Spg. and Wvg. Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. the Labour ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-07-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Bom151; (1967)69BOMLR752
L.M. Paranjpe, J. (1) In this petition under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner, which is a limited company, has prayed for a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the Labour Court whereby it has directed to pay-off compensation to the respondents workmen. (2) The petitioner company owns and runs a textile mill at Hinganghat, district Wardha. The respondents nos. 2 to 99 were employees of petitioner mill and were working in the third shift of the mill during the relevant period. The Maharashtra State Electricity Board intimated to the mill its inability to supply electric current between 8 and 9 p.m. during a certain period and requested the petitioner mill to extend the half hour's recess of the second shift by making it for one hour from 8 p.m. to 9 p.m. The petitioner had therefore to extend the second shift from midnight to 12.30 a.m. for the period from 5-8-1964 to 13-8-1964. Accordingly, a notice was put up to intimate the respondents that the third shift...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »