Mumbai Court July 1977 Judgments
Ratan and anr. Vs. Bisan Ramchandra Pardeshi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-29-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Bom190
ORDER1. These two revision applications arise out of an application filed by Bisan the son of Ramchandra Pardeshi against his uncle Deochand Bisan Pardeshi under Section 41(3) of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, for recovery of possession of the moveable and immoveable property on the ground that the latter was put in possession of the property as his guardian and on attaining majority he was entitled to get possession of his property from his uncle Deochand.2. Revision Application No. 235 of 1977 has been preferred by Deochand and Revision Application No. 401 of 1977 has been preferred by Bisan, who claims possession of the property.3. The facts in so far as they are material may be stated thus. On the death of the father of the applicant Bisan, his mother Kashibai got remarried in about the year 1952. At the time of the death of his father, his son was only 2 years old, and Kashibai's remarriage took place within a year after the death of his father. In the circumstances, he was br...
Tag this Judgment!The Municipal Corporation Vs. R.D. Tulpule
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-29-1977
Reported in: (1979)81BOMLR207; 1978MhLJ620
Chandurkar, J.1. In a domestic enquiry in respect of a misconduct which was alleged to have been committed by respondent No. 3, who is in the employment of the petitioner-Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay, the enquiry officer, who was the Assistant Labour Officer Transport, found that the charge framed against him viz. that he was guilty of indecent behaviour on the premises of the B.E.S. & T. Undertaking was proved. The Assistant Labour Officer also made an order of punishment in the nature of suspension for a month after taking into account the fact that respondent No. 3 was also earlier suspended for three days for indecent behaviour towards a Bus Examiner. It is not necessary to refer in detail to the nature of the charge and it will suffice to state that the charge against respondent No. 3 (hereinafter referred to as 'the employee') was that when the employee was called by Mr. Worlikar, the Supervisor, for handing over certain papers to the employee on February 4, 1970 on hi...
Tag this Judgment!Rukhminibai Amarsingh Thakur and ors. Vs. Bhaiyaji Rawji Bapu Wankhede
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-27-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Bom363; 1977MhLJ859
ORDER1. The petitioner-tenants are challenging the orders of the authorities under the C. P. and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Rent Control Order) granting permission to the respondent-landlord for terminating the tenancy of the petitioners on the ground that the landlord needs the house for his bona fide occupation.2. The house bearing Corporation No. 60, situate at Subhash Road, Nagpur, is owned by the respondent and it is in possession of the petitioners. The respondent filed an application under Clause 13 of the Rent Control Order seeking permission to terminate the petitioner's tenancy. That application was numbered as Rev. Case No. 531/A-71 (2) of 1969-70. The grievance of the respondent was that the petitioners had fallen in arrears of rent for more than three months and that they were also habitually in arrears of rent. On these grounds permission can be obtained under Clause 13 (3) (i) and (ii). The respondent has also all...
Tag this Judgment!The B.E.S.T. Workers' Union Vs. P.B. Kerkar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-27-1977
Reported in: (1979)81BOMLR202
Chandurkar, J.1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the B.E.S.T. Workers' Union (hereinafter referred to as 'the Union') challenging the order of the President of the Industrial Court who had set aside the order of the Labour Court holding that the respondent B.E.S.T. Undertaking (hereinafter referred to as 'the Undertaking') had made an illegal change and the application of the union came to be rejected on the ground that the necessary parties were not joined.2. The Undertaking had created two posts of statistical officer and survey officer in the grade of Rs. 325 to Rs, 630 and appointed two traffic supervisors M. N. Palvankar and S. P. Orpe to these posts respectively by promotion. The union filed an application, being Application No. 378 of 1969 for a declaration that the Undertaking had committed an illegal change, but as a result of those proceedings, the posts were discontinued from October 1, 1969 because even according to the Undertaking, ...
Tag this Judgment!Engineering Mazdoor Sabha Vs. the Registrar of Trade Unions
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-26-1977
Reported in: (1979)81BOMLR139; 1977MhLJ825
Deshmukh, J.1. By this writ petition, the petitioner, a registered trade union, seeks directions requiring respondent No. 1, the Registrar of Trade Unions, to register certain amendments in the Rules of the union, sanctioned and passed in the General Council meeting dated January 17, 1976.2. The facts that require to be remembered for the purpose of understanding the main prayer in the writ petition are these. The petitioner is Engineering Mazdoor Sabha, a trade union registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926 sometime in the year 1947. It represents the employees in the entire engineering industry in -Greater Bombay. It has a constitution and Rules which are produced at Annexure 'A' to the petition. As per those Rules the trade union was functioning; all along and was submitting regularly all the annual returns etc. to the Registrar of Trade Unions under Section 28 of the Trade Unions Act, 1926.3. The petitioner union has a General Council which is constituted by all members of the f...
Tag this Judgment!Namdeo Baliram Kathole Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-25-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Bom173; 1977MhLJ749
ORDER1. This is an instance where a grave injustice, was likely to be causedto the petitioner on account of the incorrect and improper method adopted whiledetermining the holding of the petitioner for the purpose of deciding as to whether any part of that holding is in excess of the ceiling area.2. The petitioner Namdeo Baliram Kathole is an agriculturist residing at Jambhora in Darwha tahsil. He is holding agricultural lands in that village and also at Home other places. He submitted a return under the provisions of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Ceiling Act). That return was treated as Ceiling Case Mo. 466/60-A (5)/1975-76. The Surplus Land Determination Tribunal (S. L. D. T.) held an enquiry on a hypothesis that the petitioner was holding 94.37 acres of land on 20-9-1970. According to the Tribunal, this much area was from Section Nos. 7, 9/1, 9/3, 10/1, 10/3 and 14 of Sarangpur and Section No. 30/4, 36/2, 37/1 and 37...
Tag this Judgment!Lakhani Sahakari Shetki Kharedi Vikri Sanstha Ltd. Vs. Moreshwar Bapu
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Bom273; (1979)81BOMLR129; 1978MhLJ59
Dharmadhikari, J.1. The petitioner, Lakhani Sahakari Shetki Kharedi Vikri Sanstha, Limited at Lakhani, which is a registered Co-operative Society, has challenged in this writ petition the order passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies at Nagpur, dated 25-1-1971 holding that the agreement between the petitioner Society and the respondent is a contract in between two independent principals and the dispute arising out of this contract is not a dispute within the meaning of Section 91 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred as the Act) and that the remedy of the petitioner is to file a civil suit and not to raise a dispute under Section 91 of the Act.2. It appears from the record that the present Society was the approved authorised sub-agent of the Maharashtra State Marketing Federation Limited at Bombay, under the Monopoly Procurement Scheme for paddy (Dhan) for purchasing, stocking, milling and distributing paddy after procuring th...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Gift-tax, Bombay-iii Vs. Matilda Ferreira
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1977
Reported in: [1978]112ITR934(Bom)
Kantawala, C.J. 1. This reference is at the instance of the revenue and it relates to the gift-tax assessment for the assessment year 1959-60 for which the relevant previous year ended on March 31, 1959. 2. Smt. Matilda Ferreira, the assessee, is an individual. On June 18, 1941, by his letter addressed to the Municipal Corporation of Bombay one, S. Rodrigues offered to purchase two plots of land, namely, plots Nos. 14 and 15 admeasuring 2,414 sq. yds. and 2,259 sq. yds. respectively, situate at Mahim Bazar Cross Road at the rate of Rs. 8-8-0 per sq. yd. Along with this offer an earnest amount of Rs. 3,973 was paid and the balance of the price of Rs. 35,747-8-0 was to be paid within one month from the date of the receipt of the intimation that the land was ready for being handed over. There was a superstructure on the plot which was also offered to be purchased for Rs. 300. Clause 9 of the letter contains one of the terms on the basis of which the offer to purchase was made and it runs ...
Tag this Judgment!Bhupendra Nanlal Shah Vs. the State
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1977
Reported in: (1978)80BOMLR154; 1978MhLJ138
Dighe, J1. This petition raises a question of some importance as to what order should be passed when in a non-cognizable case the investigating agency has neither obtained an order for extension of time for investigation nor has riled any charge-sheet under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The petitioner was arrested on May 24, 1975 by the R.P.F. Kurla, on the allegation that the railway receipt on which he obtained delivery of certain goods was forged. He was released on bond on June 2, 1975 on certain conditions. On October 6, 1975 F.I.R, was recorded against him by G.L.O. Kurla. On November 13, 1975 he was discharged on the request made by R.P.F. Kurla. But as soon as the petitioner came out of Court he was arrested on November 13, 1975, by inspector Tayde of the Railway C.I.D. Office, Poona. The proceedings continued under No. 118/75 of G.R.P. Kurla, Although his bail application was rejected by the Metropolitan Magistrate before whom he was produced, the Sessions C...
Tag this Judgment!Gulam Rasool Haji Yacoob Killedar and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-21-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Bom59; 1978MhLJ144
Jahagibdar, J.1. This petition has been preferred by five persons constituting a firm which has in its possession 508 acres and 28 gunthas of land at a place called Kelva Road, Taluka Palghar of District Thana. The petition seeks to challenge the refusal of the State Government to exempt the petitioners' lands under S. 47 (1) (ff) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961. According to the petitioners they are on the said lands conducting a dairy farm and the provisions referred to above entitled them to get their land exempted from the provisions of the Ceiling Act.2. By an Indenture of 15th Aug 1944 between the then Governor of Bombay and the firm of M/s. Moosa Haji Mohamed Killedar and Bros, the lands were leased to the predecessors of the petitioners for conducting a dairy farm. Since then the lands have been in possession of the petitioners' predecessors and after them with the petitioners. The lease was originally for a period of 35 years with effect f...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »