Mumbai Court February 1975 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.
Asharam Ramgopal Vs. Sarjubai Ramgopal and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-19-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom272
Kantawala, C.J. 1. Asharam Ramgopal, the plaintiff, has filed this appeal against the judgment and decree passed by Kania J. dismissing his suit for a declaration that his step mother, Defendant No. 1, got a restricted estate in the moveable and immovable properties coming to her share as a result of the partition and that she was entitled to only. a life interest n the said moveable and immovable properties. By the plaint also. injunction was claimed against defendant No. 1 restraining her, servants and agents from selling, alienating, encumbering or otherwise dealing with or despising of the said moveable and immovable properties. There is no controversy as regards the facts of the case. One Ramgopal Jagannath deed on or about May 21, 1950, leaving behind him his widow Sarjubai, Defendant No. 1 and three sons, Asharam Ramgopal plaintiff by his first wife and Nandkishore Ramgopal and Chandmal Ramgopal, both minors at the time of his death, by his wife Sarjubai. At the time of Ramgopal...
Laxmibai Samba Jadhav and ors. Vs. Bharatlal Premchand Gandhi and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-18-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom160
Apte, J.1. This second appeal has been referred by Nathwani, J., sitting singly to this Division Bench inasmuch as in his opinion the case involved an important question of construction of the provisions of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tenancy Act')2. The suit out of which this appeal arises was instituted by the respondents for a declaration that the partition as evidenced by the partition deed dated 12 the December, 1957, effected between themselves had in fact been effected and that the same was binding on the defendants. They further prayed that the said partition be directed to be entered in the Record of rights.3. The facts are shortly these:4. The suit property which consists of pieces of agricultural lands and a house described in detail is in paragraphs 1-A and 1-B of the plaint belonged to Daji Walchand Gujar, the maternal grandfather of the plaintiffs. He gifted this property under a registered deed of gift dated August...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Zeal and Company
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-17-1975
Reported in: [1975]35STC486(Bom)
Madon, J.1. In this reference under section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, the following question has been submitted to us for our determination : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the sale effected under Bill No. 1972 dated 17th November, 1964, of tamarind seed powder was covered by entry 12 of Schedule A appended to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, and as such exempt from payment of any tax ?' 2. This question arose out of an application made by the respondents to the Commissioner of Sales Tax under section 52(1) of the said Act requesting the Commissioner of Sales Tax to determine whether tamarind seed powder feel under the said entry. Along with the said application the respondents enclosed their Bill No. 1972 dated 17th November, 1964, for the sale of a certain quantity of tamarind seed powder by them to their customer. The Commissioner of Sales Tax held that it fell under the residuary entry No....
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Mckenzies Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-17-1975
Reported in: [1976]38STC391(Bom)
Kania, J.1. This is a reference under section 34(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'). 2. The facts which have given rise to this reference are as follows : The respondents are dealers registered under the said Act. On 30th January, 1954, the respondents entered into a contract with the Government of India for the supply of certain goods or stores consisting mainly of venetian shutters and shutter parts to the Western Railway. The terms and conditions of this contract are contained in a schedule to the acceptance of tender, a copy of which forms part of the record. From these terms and conditions, it appears that against the heading 'place of delivery', it is stated 'free delivery in Bombay'. Under the heading 'terms of delivery', there is another heading 'despatch instructions' and against it, the following appears : 'To be delivered to the Inspection Officer (Stores), Western Rly., Mahalaxmi, Bombay, for onward despatch to the District Cont...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Bombay Mercantile Corporation
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-17-1975
Reported in: [1975]35STC505(Bom)
Kania, J.1. This is a reference under section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'). 2. The facts giving rise to this reference are as follows : The respondent was a dealer in lubricating oil. During the assessment period 1st January, 1960, to 30th June, 1960, the respondent purchased six drums of lubricating oil, hand-blended the same and sold the resulting mixture. The Sales Tax Officer who assessed the respondent for the period 1st January, 1960, to 30th June, 1960, came to the conclusion that in selling the said goods, viz., the said hand-blended oil, the respondent had not made a resale as defined in section 2(26) of the said Act and hence disallowed the claim of the respondent for deduction in respect of the amount realised from the said sales. The respondent appealed against this decision to the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, who dismissed the appeal holding that the process of hand-blending changed the thickness or thinness of...
N.D. Georgopoulos Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-13-1975
Reported in: [1976]37STC187(Bom)
Madon, J. 1. These are two references under section 34(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bombay Act'), in which a common question of law is involved. These references first reached hearing before this High Court on 2nd November, 1968, when, after considerable debate on both sides, it was realized by the parties concerned that it was not possible to dispose of the references on the basis of the statement of the case drawn up by the Tribunal, as it did not acquaint the court either with the facts of the case or the contentions of law advanced on both sides. Accordingly, the parties arrived at an agreement that a fresh statement of the case should be called for from the Tribunal under section 34(4) of the Bombay Act on the basis of the materials which might be placed before it. Accordingly, with the consent of the parties the Division Bench directed that both the parties should be allowed to file the original documents which were produced or which were ...
Gangadhar Sadhashiorao Watane and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-12-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom13
Dharmadhikari, J.1. The petitioner in both these petitions are agriculturists and cultivators in the Vidarbha region of the State of Maharashtra and according to them they solely depend upon agriculture f or their maintenance and livelihood. The petitioners in these cases have tendered their cotton at the cotton centers as per the pervasions of the Maharashtra Raw Cotton (procurement Processing and Marketing) Act, 1971 referred to hereinafter as the Act. It is contended by them that they were entitled to receive 80 per cent of the guaranteed price for the quantity of cotton tendered by them and the cotton tendered by them and the action of the respondents incorporated in Government resolution dated 28th December, 1974 providing revised mode of payment to the cotton tenderers under the scheme, and the provision of Section 25, 26 and 27 of the Act, depriving them of their right to get 80 per cent guaranteed price in lump-sum is violate of their fundamental right under Article 31 of the C...
India United Mills Ltd. Vs. Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-12-1975
Reported in: (1976)78BOMLR458
Dighe, J.1. The short question for decision in this petition is whether the cessation of work by the employees of the petitioner-mills on November IS, 1970 could be called as legal strike. The first respondent, Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh, is the recognised union so far as the petitioner is concerned. The other three respondents are the employees, The fifth respondent is the Labour Court in which the relief was sought by the petitioner.2. According to the petitioner, all the employees of all the departments in the mill struck work between 3-40 p.m. and 6-20 p.m. on November 18, 1970, that is because, they desired that the representatives of the first respondent union should be turned out of the mill or that they should be made to resign from the membership of the Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh. It seemed to be their grievance that the first respondent union had been conducted in the interest of the employers and to the prejudice of the interest of the employees and in order to impress t...
Sarfarzali Nawabali Mirza Vs. Miss Maneck G. Burjorji Reporter
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-11-1975
Reported in: (1976)78BOMLR704; 1976MhLJ576
Apte, J.1. This revision petition by the original defendant is directed against the findings recorded by the Judge of the City Civil Court, Bombay, in Short Cause Suit No. 3413 of 1.973 on two preliminary issues. The first issue was whether City Civil Court had jurisdiction to try the suit and the second issue was whether the suit was properly valued. On the first issue the learned Judge recorded a finding in the affirmative and on the second in the negative and directed the original plaintiff-respondent to pay the deficit Court-fees on the amount of Rs. 7,350 which was found to be the proper valuation of the suit. Against these findings the defendant preferred an appeal.2. When the appeal came up for final hearing before Lentin J., it was pointed out that conflicting observations were made by Vaidya J. on the one hand and Gandhi J. on the other in different matters on the very point which arises for consideration in this case. It appears, in A.O. No. 328 of 1974 which came up for hear...
Krishnadevi Gupta and anr. Vs. Banwarilal Hanuman Prasad Tibrewala and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-11-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom233
ORDER1. On October 5 1973, the dispute between the Highway Rose Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., who is respondent No. 3 in the above Civil Revision Application and Krishna Devi P. Gupta petitioner No. 1 on the one side and Banwarilal Tibrewala who is respondent No. 2 in the above petition on the other was referred under Sections 91 to 96 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act 1960, to the District Deputy Registrar Co-operative Societies, Bombay. In that dispute the Co-operative Society prayed for eviction of Banwarilal Tibrewala on the ground that he was an unauthorised occupant of the premises which are part of the building belonging to the Society. The dispute was in due course referred by the District Deputy Registrar to the Officer on Special Duty for adjudication.2. During the pendency of the matter before the Officer on special duty Tibrewala filed R. A. Declaratory suit stamp No. 1386 of 1974, in the Court Small Causes, at Bombay, claiming a declaration that he was the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »