Mumbai Court September 1979 Judgments
Doma and anr. Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-28-1979
Reported in: 1981CriLJ653
Waikar, J.1. This judgment shall dispose of Criminal Appeals Nos. (i3 and 64 both of the year 1978. Criminal appeal No. 63 of 1978 has been preferred by the original accused No. 1, Doma, while Criminal Appeal No. 64 of 1978, has been preferred by original accused No. 2 Diwan, both of whom in a joint trial, were convicted by the Special Judge, Bhandara for the offences under Section 161 read with Sec 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. A compendious sentence against each of them was passed sentencing each of them to rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-; or in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two months.2. Appellant Doma original accused No. 1 was working as a Patwari with his headquarters at mouza Irali while appellant Diwan original accused No. 2 was working as a Kolwal at mouza Umri at the material time. Maroti (P. W. 3) resident of Umri had agreed to purchase some land from...
Tag this Judgment!Controller of Estate Duty, Bombay City-i Vs. General Manager, Bank of ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-27-1979
Reported in: (1980)18CTR(Bom)187; [1981]131ITR626(Bom)
Kania, J.1. This is a reference under s. 64(1) of the E.D. Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'), made at the instance of the Controller of Estate Duty, Bombay City-I, Bombay. 2. The facts giving rise to this reference are as follow : By an indenture dated April 28, 1950 and duly registered under the provisions of the Indian Registration Act, one B. V. Wagh (hereinafter referred to as 'the donor'), gifted his house situated at Khar to his wife, Sarojini B. Wagh. Till his death on March 20, 1963, the donor continued to live with his wife, the donee, in a part of the gifted house. The rest of the house was let out to a tenant and the rental agreement in respect of that portion of the house was executed by the tenant in favour of the donee alone. the rents realised from the tenant in respect of the aforesaid portion of the house were credited in a bank account standing in the joint names of the donee and the donor, the name of the donee appearing first. The Income-tax Appe...
Tag this Judgment!Ramnath Nandlal Dhoot and Co. and anr. Vs. B.R. Shroti and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-26-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Bom387
ORDER1. The day-to-day hearing of this suit is interrupted on account of the 2nd defendants producing documents which are neither disclosed in the affidavit of documents nor produced at or before the settlement of issues. The Plaintiffs have closed their case. The 1st defendant is absent throughout. The 2nd Defendants' first witness's examination-in-chief is in progress. The plaintiffs strongly object to the production of the documents on several grounds. In order to appreciate the controversy, a brief note of the nature of the suit be made.2. There are two plaintiffs. The 1st Plaintiff's claim that on 20th February 1969 the 1st Defendant appointed them as pucca Adatiyas. The 1st Plaintiffs sold to the 2nd Plaintiffs caster seeds by two contracts dated 24th February, 1969, and 1st March, 1969. The 2nd defendants-South-Central Railway had appointed the 1st defendant as Out-Agency Contractor at Karimnagar and the term of the 1st Defendant was expiring on 28th February, 1969. The 1st Defe...
Tag this Judgment!Govind Krishna Jadhav Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-21-1979
Reported in: (1980)82BOMLR173; 1980MhLJ72
R.A. Jahagirdar, J.1. In Sessions Case No. 148 of 1974 tried by the learned Sessions Judge of Sholapur three persons were prosecuted for the offences punishable under section 302 read with section 34 and section 202 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused No. 1 is the father while accused Nos. 2 and 3 are his sons. The following table brings out the relationship between the parties :Namdeo|----------------------------------------------------------| |Krishna Accused 1 Babu| |--------------------- ------------------------ | | | |Govind Accused 2 Gopal accused 3 Jayaram (deceased) =SindhuJayaram, who is the victim of the offence for which this prosecution was launched, is the nephew of accused No. 1 and the cousin of accused Nos. 2 and 3. They are all residents of village called Tadavale in Barsi Taluka of Sholapur District. We are not narrating the detailed allegations, which according to the prosecution led to the commission of this crime because it is not disputed that t...
Tag this Judgment!P.M. Rawal and anr. Vs. Controller of Estate Duty, Bombay City-i
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-20-1979
Reported in: [1980]124ITR181(Bom); [1980]3TAXMAN171(Bom)
Madon, J.1. This is reference under s. 64(1) of the E.D. Act, 1953, made at the instance of the accountable person. Two questions have been submitted to us for our opinion in this reference. These questions are as follows : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sums of (a) Rs. 13,000 gifted by the deceased to his near relations from his personal account with Messrs. Rawal and Co., Bombay, in which he was a partner, and (b) Rs. 31,000 gifted by the deceased to his near relations from his personal account with M. G. Rawal, Hindu undivided family, of which the deceased was a coparcener, are includible in the principal value of the estate of the deceased, in view of the provisions of section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 20,000, being part of the trust fund lying in the account of Messrs. Rawal and Co., in which the deceased was a partner, was includible in the principal value o...
Tag this Judgment!Controller of Estate Duty, Pune Vs. R.G. Deshmukh
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-20-1979
Reported in: [1980]124ITR273(Bom); [1980]3TAXMAN260(Bom)
Kania, J.1. This is a reference under s. 64(1) of the E.D. Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'), made at the instance of the CED, Pune. The following two questions have been refereed to us for determination in this reference : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ante-adoption agreement dated April 18, 1931, and the ratification agreement dated December 22, 1934, amounted to a settlement or disposition of the properties in question 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the estates in question covered by the agreements referred to in question No. 1 above are not includible in the estate of the deceased by virtue of section 24(1) of the Estate Duty Act ?' 2. The facts giving rise to this reference are as follows : One Sardar Gangadharrao Deshmukh was a second class Sardar holding a watan estate in the district of Khandesh under a sanad under the Golden Settlement granted by the then Government on May 12, 1899. Gang...
Tag this Judgment!MohiuddIn Tayab Sony Vs. the State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-20-1979
Reported in: 1980CriLJ1040; 1980MhLJ742
Dhaumadhikari, J.1. The petitioner Mohinuddin Tayab Sony is an Indian national and citizen of India. According to him in the normal course of his trade he used to go abroad on business trips. On one of such routine trips, he went abroad on 16th Feb. 1975 to attend to his business affairs and since then he has been putting up abroad visiting several countries to attend to his business affairs. According to the petitioner when this petition was filed be was putting up in Dubai and has been carrying on construction business. He is also an authorised representative of several manufacturers of goods of general merchandise for the Middle-East countries. It is the case of the petitioner that he has never been involved in any case involving any offence under the Customs Act and/or Foreign Exchange Regulation Act and at no material time he was ever summoned to appear before any Customs or Enforcement Officer in connection with any enquiry or investigation pertaining to any seizure of goods or o...
Tag this Judgment!Rama Bhopya Teli, Etc. Etc. Vs. Naimunnisa Naimunbi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-19-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Bom247; 1980MhLJ82
ORDER1. Both these petitions raise common questions. Field Survey No. 20, measuring 30 acres 30 gunthas of Mouza Hiwari, Taluka Kelapur, District Yavatmal is in possession of Petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 122/74 and Field Survey No. 26/1, measuring 7 acres 22 gunthas of the same village is in possession of the petitioners in Special Civil Application No. 123/74. The landholder/respondent is common. Some time in the year 1968, the respondent filed two applications under Section 100 (2) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for a declaration that the petitioners were not tenants over the property and that they were trespassers.2. The undisputed facts emerging from the pleadings as well as from the evidence seem to be as under:--(1) That the property in dispute some time before 1951 belonged to the mother of the respondent on whose death, disputes started in the revenue Courts about the succession to t...
Tag this Judgment!Chetan B. Thadani Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-1979
Reported in: 1983LC630D(Bombay); 1987(30)ELT287(Bom)
1. The petitioner owns a proprietory concern manufacturing Pressure Cookers of various sizes and the concern is registered with the Director of Industries as a small-scale industry. The petitioner sells the whole of its output to M/s. Vijay Trading Corporation, a partnership firm consisting of 5 partners, all of whom are unrelated to the petitioner. 2. On August 11, 1972, the petitioner submitted to the Excise authorities, the price-list in the prescribed form and in Column L5, the 'assessable value' was declared. The assessable value declared was the price at which the pressure cookers were sold by the petitioner to Messrs. Vijay trading Corporation. The petitioner requested the Excise authorities to complete the assessment on that basis for the purposes of Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The price-list was approved by the Customs authorities on November 18, 1972. The petitioner sought confirmation and that was also given by letter dated December 15, 1972. 3. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Controller of Estate Duty, Bombay City Ii Vs. Shantilal Mulchand and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1979
Reported in: (1980)14CTR(Bom)41; [1980]124ITR175(Bom); [1980]3TAXMAN172(Bom)
Kania, J.1. This is a reference under s. 64(1) of the E.D. Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'), made at the instance of the CED, Bombay City II. The questions referred to us for our determination are as follows : '1. Whether section 10 of the Estate Duty Act covers gifts of cash amounts 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the total sum of Rs. 1,60,000 gifted by the deceased to his sons and grandsons was includible in the estate of the deceased by virtue of section 10 of the Estate Duty Act 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, a sum of Rs. 31,580 being the value of 6% share in the goodwill of the firm of M/s. Amubhai Mulchand held by the minor, Sharadkumar, was includible in the value of the estate of the deceased by virtue of section 10 of the Act ?' 2. As far as question No. 1 concerned, it is unnecessary to consider the same, because it is common ground that it is completely covered by question No. 2. As far as ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »