Mumbai Court October 1983 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.
Dineshkumar Hanumanprasad Tiwari Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Bom34
ORDER1. This order shall also dispose if Criminal Applications Nos. 470/ 83. 471/83. 479/83, 480/83, 483/83 and 558/83. In all these petitions, the petitioners are the proprietors of caf and restaurants which are being run in different parts of the State of Maharashtra. The petitioners are exhibiting films in their restaurants to their customers, free of charge, through Video and T. V. sets. According to them the exhibition of cinema, free of charges to the customers with the aid of magnetic tape cannot come under the provisions of the Cinematograph Act, 1952. They have further stated that the Video Cassette Recorder, popularly known as VCR, is both black and white as well as colour on magnetic tape without havinggg cellulose or some other synthetic base and, therefore, cannot be called 'film' as the word was understood when the According to them, at that time, the film meant a sheet or ribbon of celluloid of the like prepared with the coating for ordinary photographs or for instantane...
Madhya Pradesh Industrial and Commercial Corportation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Tr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Bom135; 1984MhLJ239
Ginwala, J.1. The petitioner owned a truck. On 13-8-1975 it intimated respondent 2 who is the Taxing Authority under the Bombay Motor Vehicles Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') in form 'NT' prescribed under RS. 5 Bombay Motor Vehicles (Tax) Rules, 1959, )hereinafter referredto as 'the Rules ') that it would not use or kep for use in the State of Maharashtra the said vehicle for the period commencing from 13-8-1975 to 31-8-1976 and that during the abovesaid period the vehicle would be kept at Oka Marg, Jathapeth , Akola. On 16-12-1975 the vehicle was removed from the abovesaid lace to another site which is about a furlong away from the former without obtaining the previouspermission of respondent 2 as required by clause 2 of form 'NT' . On 19-2-1976 the petitioner sought the permission from the Motor Vehicle Inspector al Akola for removing the vehicle from the said site to the garage of a mechanic for repairs. The said Inspector. After visitingthe site on that day and...
Prakash @ Pakya Mahadeo Raut and Ashok Babu Jadhav @ Ashok Bhangi Vs. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-1983
Reported in: 1984(1)BomCR245
B.C. Gadgil, J.1. These two petitions can be conveniently decided by a common judgment, as they pertain to the detention of two detenus practically on same and similar grounds.2. Prakash is the petitioner in Criminal Writ Petition No. 382 of 1983 while in the other Criminal Writ Petition No. 383 of 1983 Ashok is the petitioner. For the sake of convenience, we would refer to both these petitioners by their names and not as petitioner in a particular petition. Prakash and Ashok are the residents of Thane. On 7th November, 1982, the Commissioner of Police, Thane, issued two separate orders, one against Prakash and other against Ashok, for their detention under the National Security Act. By these petitions, Prakash and Ashok have challenged those detention orders. Though, in the petition, there are a number of grounds, the only challenge that is urged before us is that grounds Nos. 1, 2 and 4 are relevant for the purpose of taking a subjective decision that conduct of Prakash and Ashok was...
American Express International Vs. Inspecting Assistant
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-13-1983
Reported in: (1983)6ITD373(Mum.)
1. These two appeals, one filed by the assessee and the other filed by the department, are heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. The assessee is non-resident Banking Company, deriving income from banking business. The assessment year involved in these appeals is 1977-78. The relevant previous year was the year ended 31-12-1976.3. In the departmental appeal, the following three grounds have been taken : (i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding that the amount of Rs. 3,06,399 (sic) part of the purchase price of securities, being the estimate of the interest alleged to have accrued up to the date of purchase, should be allowed as deduction from the income from such securities chargeable in the year of account. (ii) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in directing that the amount of Rs. 7,83,288 credite...
Nav Bharat Hindi Daily, Nagpur Vs. Nav Bharat Shramik Sangha and Anoth ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-13-1983
Reported in: [1982]134ITR655a(Bom); (1985)ILLJ474Bom; 1984MhLJ483
Patel, J.1. The petitioner 'Navbharat' Hind daily, Nagpur, was being published by 'Navbharat Press', Nagpur, a registered partnership firm. Respondent No. 1, hereinafter referred to as the respondent was at the relevant time a registered trade union of workmen engaged in Navbharat Press. Till the year 1968-69 the work of composing was mainly done by hand compositors. In the same year the petitioner purchased one mono composing machine and after its installation the work of composing was partly done by that machine and partly by hand. The petitioner installed an additional mono composing machine in March 1973. Soon thereafter in May, 1973, the services of the thirteen compositors came to be terminated on the ground that they have been retrenched from the service.2. Whereupon the President of the respondent addressed a letter dated 8th May, 1973 to the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Nagpur, which is said to have been delivered in the office on 10th May, 1973. On the same day the Deputy C...
Smt. Sayamma Vs. Shabbir Ahmed A. Rehman and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-13-1983
Reported in: (1984)ILLJ273Bom
1. This is an appeal by the original Applicant who is the widow of the deceased workman. The Applicant had filed claim for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 on the ground that her deceased husband Poshanna was employed along with other workmen by Opposite Parties Nos. 1 and 2 for doing the work of clearing and painting of chimneys of Opposite Party No. 2. Opposite Party No. 1 had taken the contract of the said work from Opposite Party No. 2. On the 3rd November, 1975, the deceased who had gone up the chimney on a scaffolding fell from a height of about 80 feet and sustained fatal injuries. He died on the same evening. On being served with the notices as required by the Act, the Opposite Parties deposited Rs. 13,500/- as compensation to be paid to the dependents of the deceased. The Applicant however claimed that the deceased was earning Rs. 15/- per day, and therefore, he fell within the wage group of Rs. 400-500, and hence he was entitled to a compensation of Rs....
Ashok Kashinath Kale Vs. Ravindra Jadhav and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-13-1983
Reported in: 1983(2)BomCR763
B.C. Gadgil, J.1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 12-4-1983 (Exhibit 'E' to the petition) passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jalgaon, under section 56(a) and 56(b) of the Bombay Police Act externing the petitioner from the districts of Jalgaon, Buldhana and Aurangabad, for a period of two years. The petitioner had preferred an appeal to the State Government against this order. However, that appeal has been dismissed on 16-7-1982.2. Though a number of contentions have been raised in the petition, Shri Chitnis, for the petitioner argued only one point which goes to the root of the case. It is not, therefore, necessary to consider the rest of the contentions. An order under section 56 is permissible if the concerned authority is satisfied (a) that the movements or acts of the petitioner are causing or calculated to cause alarm, danger or harm to any person or property or (b) that there are reasonable grounds for believing that such person is e...
Hausabai Tukaram Wable Vs. Waman Kondaji Ghogare
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-13-1983
Reported in: (1984)86BOMLR163; 1984MhLJ168
S.J. Deshpande, J.1. This is a reference made by the learned Extra Assistant and Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, arising out of a criminal case which was committed to him by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Shrirampur, by his order dated April 2, 1983. The facts giving rise to this reference may be stated briefly as follows:The complainant Hausabai was in possession of a field Gat No. 285 of Mouje Loni Kd. She was at the material time present in the field. .It is alleged that accused Nos. 1 to 13 committed trespass and also indulged in the act of taking away some properties. It was also alleged that the accused caused simple hurts to her, to her grand-children and to her daughter-in-law, who were also present in the field. She alleged that she .has seen the incident. The incident relates to acts which give rise to the offences under Sections 395, 323 and 447 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Alleging that accused Nos, 1 to 13 have committed these acts, the comp...
KabiruddIn Kassamali Omani and Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-12-1983
Reported in: (1984)(16)ELT450Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These two appeals arise out of and are directed against the order bearing No. S/14-4-17/82 dated 20-9-1982 passed by the Additional Collector of Customs (Prev.), Bombay, by which he ordered absolute confiscation of the goods seized from the residence of the appellants and imposed a personal penalty of Rs. 20.000/- on each of them.2. As these two appeals arise out of an order and as common facts are involved, they are disposed of by a single order. A copy of this order, however, shall be kept in each of the file.3. The undisputed facts are that during the course of the search of the residential premises of the appellants who are husband and wife, the Preventive Officers seized the goods of foreign origin such as textiles, and cassette tapes collectively valued at Rs. 14,151/- C.I.F.and Rs. 42,453/- M.V. and the appellants were unable to produce any documents or could give any satisfactory explanation for licit importation or acquisition of the seized goods. During the enquiry the hu...
Popatlal Amichand Shah Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-12-1983
Reported in: (1984)86BOMLR174
Gadgil, J.1. By this petition the petitioner is challenging the detention order dated 3-4-1975 Ex. A to the petition. This order was issued under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the 'COFEPOSA Act'). Along with the detention order the grounds of detention were also formulated and this can be seen from Ex. C to the petition. In pursuance of this detention order the petitioner was detained and in due course of time he was released in the month of March 1977 on revocation of emergency. It appears that on the basis of this detention order certain proceedings under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulates (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the 'SAFEMA Act') have been initiated. There are certain penal consequences arising out of these SAFEMA proceedings. The petitioner, therefore, filed the present writ petition challenging the detention order as mentioned above.2. In the petit...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »