Mumbai Court November 1981 Judgments
Mir KarimoddIn AjmoddIn Kavjang and ors. Vs. Kashinath Bhimsen Ingale ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1981
Reported in: 1982(1)BomCR182
V.S. Deshpande, C.J.1. One Kashinath Ingale, the ancestor of respondent No. 1, herein instituted Reg. Civil Suit No. 419 of 1967 for possession of the house property. The house property bears Municipal Committee No. 1412 of CTS No. 1592 of Ahmednagar. Fakira Mahadu and four others were the defendants in the said suit. According to the plaintiff Kashinath, Fakira was his tenant and defendant No. 2 was unlawful sub-tenant of defendant No. 1 Fakira. Other defendant Nos. 3 to 5 were impleaded to avoid possible obstructions from them. This suit was decreed on 5-12-1969. The appeal of the defendant Nos. 1 to 4 against the same No. 30 of 1970 was dismissed with costs on 28-6-1972. Kashinath died in the meanwhile and his heirs the respondents Nos. 1-A to 1-F initiated Darkhast Proceedings No. 220 of 1972. Baburao Yallappa, the father of the defendant Nos. 3 to 4 in the original suit No. 419 of 1967 instituted Reg. Civil Suit No. 529 of 1972 for declaration of their ownership of the same house....
Tag this Judgment!All India Reporter Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-27-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Bom41; 1982TAXLR2422
Sujata Manohar, J.1. In this petition the first petitioners have sought approval under the provisions of S. 214(1-B) of the Companies Act to the appointment of the second petitioner as Administrative officer of the first petitioner Company on a salary of Rs. 4000 in the pay-scale of Rs. 4000-250-5250. The second petitioner is the younger brother of the General Manager of the first petitioner Company and accordingly sanction is required for his being appointed as Administrative Officer in the pay scale of Rs. 4000-250-4250. The second petitioner is a graduate. He is working with the first petitioner since 1954. He was designated as Assistant Manager with effect from 1-4-1967 and his remuneration was fixed at Rs. 1500-100-2000 with effect from 1-4-1967. He reached the maximum in the scale on 1-4-1972. Thereafter on account of the 25% increase in the salary which was granted by the first petitioner to all its imployees, he started drawing a monthly salary of Rs. 2500 with effect from 1-9-...
Tag this Judgment!Sakhubai (Smt.) W/O Gajanan Gadekar and ors. Vs. Catherine Antoni Nico ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-24-1981
Reported in: 1982(1)BomCR793
R.A. Jahagirdar, J.1. One Gajanan Gadekar was the original owner of a property bearing No. 1030 and situated at Old Modikhana, Pune No. 1. One Antoni Nicolas was the tenant in the suit property. Suit No. 2004 of 1970 was filed by the said Gadekar against the tenant for possession of the premises tenanted by the latter on several grounds. That suit was dismissed on 15th December, 1971 in so far as it related to possession. Thereafter the said Gadekar preferred an appeal, being Civil Appeal No. 206 of 1972, which was allowed by the Appeal Court of Pune by its judgment and order dated 7th October, 1972. Against the decision of the Appeal Court, the tenant preferred a petition, being Special Civil Application No. 290 of 1973, to this Court. During the pendency of this petition in this Court both Gadekar and Antoni expired and their legal representatives were brought on record. Ultimately the writ petition was dismissed by this Court on 12th February, 1979.2. In the meantime, a darkhast app...
Tag this Judgment!State of Maharashtra Through the Collector and ors. Vs. Cycle Rickshaw ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-24-1981
Reported in: 1982(2)BomCR166
M.P. Kanade, J.1. This second appeal by the State is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned District Judge, Nanded, dated November 26, 1976, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 62 of 1975.2. The Cycle Rickshaw Union, Nanded, through its General Secretary filed a suit against the appellants-original defendants for a declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to represent the member rickshaw owners in all official functions of the rickshaw owners for a perpetual injunction restraining defendants Nos. 2 and 3 from compelling personal attendance of rickshaw owners. The learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Nanded, by a judgment and decree dated July 21,1975, decreed the plaintiff's suit on the following terms :---'(1) Be it hereby declared that the Cycle Rickshaw Union, Nanded, through its General Secretary is entitled to represent the member rickshaw owners of Nanded so long as the union continues to function and continues to function for lawful purposes, in the office o...
Tag this Judgment!Golden Tobacco Company Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-23-1981
Reported in: (1982)84BOMLR274; 1983(14)ELT2238(Bom)
1. This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the Golden Tobacco Company Limited, who carry on the business of manufacturing cigarettes, against the Union of India and the Collector of Central Excise. At the relevant time the petitioners' factory was situate at Swami Vivekanand Road, Vile Parle, Bombay. The cigarettes manufactured by the Petitioners were, at the relevant time, subjected to the payment of ad valorem excise duty under Item 4 in the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944). The Petitioners had appointed sole distributors for different parts of India, and, therefore, for the purpose of marketing their goods the Petitioners sold the cigarettes manufactured by them to such sole distributors, who in turn sold them to wholesale dealers, Such wholesale dealers would sell the cigarettes to ordinary retailers, who would finally sell them to consumers. The number of such distributors appointed by the Petitioners has v...
Tag this Judgment!State of Maharashtra and anr. Vs. Mohanlal S/O Purshottamdas Patel and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-20-1981
Reported in: 1982(2)BomCR148
D.B. Deshpande, J.1. This appeal by the State Government is directed against the order of the learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Parbhani, in Land Acquisition Reference No. 1 of 1975 on his file enhancing the amount of compensation granted to the claimants by the Land Acquisition Officer and feeling aggrieved by the meagre enhancement awarded by the trial Court the original claimants have filed cross-objections in this appeal and this appeal and the cross-objections arise out of the following facts.2. An area of 5 acres 4 gunthas out of Survey No. 331 situated within the limits of Parbhani town out of total area of 5 acres 19 gunthas was acquired by the State Government for the purpose of Agriculture College at Parbhani. The date of notification under section 3 of the Hyderabad Land Acquisition Act, 1309, Fasli, is 17th November, 1960. In response to notice under the Land Acquisition Act, the claimants laid their claim before the Land Acquisition Officer and after considering the ...
Tag this Judgment!Modern Paper Converters Vs. S.V. Kotnis and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-18-1981
Reported in: (1982)ILLJ394Bom
1. This petition raises a dispute about the extent of the jurisdiction of the Labour Court under S. 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Only few facts need be mentioned to understand the controversy between the parties. Respondents Nos. 2 to 6, hereinafter referred to as 'the respondents', had along with some others filed an application, being application No. 1345 of 1973, in the Labour Court at Bombay under S. 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act claiming minimum wages under a notification issued under the Minimum Wages Act made applicable to the printing presses. The Labour Court took the view that there was a dispute relating to the coverage of the notification and this dispute was beyond the scope of the jurisdiction of the Labour Court under S. 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Labour Court also took the view that since the respondents had failed to lead evidence to prove that the notification applied to the petitioner concern, the respondents were not entitled ...
Tag this Judgment!Santdas S/O Sadromal Chawla Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-17-1981
Reported in: 1982(2)BomCR369
S.W. Puranik, J. 1. The applicant in Criminal Application No. 224 of 1981 is accused with the offence under section 7(3) of Essential Commodities Act read with Clauses 8 and 15 of the Maharashtra Cement (Licensing and Control) Order, 1973 of the State of Maharashtra. The prosecution alleges that on 19-3-1980, the Police Investigating Officer of Lakadganj Police Station, Nagpur got information that the applicant accused is in wrongful possession of cement stock in contravention of the provisions of the Maharashtra Cement (Licensing and Control) Order, 1973, hereinafter referred to as the 'Cement Control Order' for the sake of brevity, and therefore, an offence is committed by the applicant under the Essential Commodities Act. The Investigating Officer, therefore, conducted a raid on one room which the applicant had taken on rent from on Nilkanth for stocking the cement. The raid was conducted in the presence of Panchas and it was found that 741/2 bags of cement were lying there in the n...
Tag this Judgment!Vilas Gangaram Khetle Vs. S.D. Rane, Presiding Officer and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-1981
Reported in: [1982(44)FLR286]
Dharmadhikari, J.1. This petition is filed by the petitioner Vilas Gangaram Khetle, an employee of the 2nd respondent, the Bombay Dyeing and ., against the orders passed by the 1st Labour Court dated 20th October, 1981 and 22nd October, 1981 declaring the strike resorted to by the Technical, Supervisory and Clerical Staff in the New Bleaching Works of the Mills from 5th October, 1981 as illegal under S. 97(1)(a)(b) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act).2. It appears from the record that the respondent-mills filed an application under S. 91 of the Act for a declaration that the strike resorted to by about 316 employees working in the Technical supervisory and clerical sections of the mills is illegal. On receipt of this application notice were issued to all the employees. A public notice was also published in Marathi Daily 'Navakal' in the issue dated 10th October, 1980. In response to this public notice respondent employees appeared befo...
Tag this Judgment!Good Luck Talkies and ors. Vs. Bank of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-1981
Reported in: 1982(1)BomCR268
V.S. Deshpande, C.J.1. This the defendants' appeal against the preliminary decree dated 3rd May, 1980 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Alibag, in favour of the respondent-Bank. Defendant No. 1 is a partnership firm while defendants Nos. 2 to 5 are its partners. The defendants executed a registered simple mortgage deed in favour of the plaintiff on 23rd December, 1969 and obtained a loan of Rs. 2,00,000 against the same. The amount was liable to be returned within five years as specified in the mortgage deed. Interest was agreed initially to be paid at the rate of 9 1/2% per annum and was liable to be computed at quarter, rests. In the event of non-payment of interest in cash, the same was liable to be debited to the defendants' account and further interest was liable to be calculated on the amount due inclusive of unpaid interest. The Bank was also authorised to vary the rate of interest from time to time. By the time the suit came to be instituted, interest was rai...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »