Mumbai Court November 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.
Sushama Sharadchandra Budhisagar (Sou.) Vs. Pune Vidyarthi Graha and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-15-1983
Reported in: 1984(2)BomCR299
H.H. Kantharia, J.1. By this Civil Revision Application, the petitioner Sou. Sushama Sharadchandra Budhisagar challenges an order dated 15th June, 1983, passed by the learned 4th Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division), Pune, below Exh. 26 in R.C.S. No. 1921 of 1981, rejecting her application to implead her as a necessary party in the said suit.2. The short facts giving rise, to this Revision Application are that the petitioner was working as a full-time teacher in Maharashtra Vidyalaya at Pune, a School run by respondent No. 1 viz., Pune Vidyarthi Graha, Sadashiv Peth, Pune-411 030. She was retrenched on 27th July, 1979 from service on the alleged ground that the number of Divisions of Standard VIII and Standard X were reduced during the academic year 1979-80 on account of which her services were no longer required. This retrenchment order was said to have been made under Rule 77.4 of the Secondary Schools Code. The petitioner challenged the said order passed by respondent No. 1 before th...
Allibhai Abdulla Vs. Akbarali Amiji Nagri
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-15-1983
Reported in: 1984(2)BomCR433
H.H. Kantharia, J.1. This is an appeal from order passed by the learned Judge of the City Civil Court, Bombay on 22-2-80 in Notice of Motion No. 4478 of 1979 in S.C. Suit No. 881 of 1962 dismissing the application by the present appellant that the execution of a decree be set aside and he be restored the possession of the suit premises.2. The short facts giving rise to this appeal are that respondent Nos. 1 and 2 (hereinafter referred to as the 'plaintiffs') filed S.C. Suit No. 881 of 1962 in the City Civil Court, Bombay on 22-2-1962 against respondent No. 3 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Defendant') in respect of a shop bearing No. 18, House No. 147/151, Behind Bazar, Bombay -400 003 (hereinafter referred to as the 'suit premises') for declaration that the defendant was a trespasser on the suit premises and that by mandatory and permanent injunction he, his servants and agents be permanently restrained from entering upon the said premises and further that he be ordered to pay to the...
Bhabdara Zilla Sahakari Shetki Kharedi Vikri Samiti Ltd. Vs. Damodar a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-14-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Bom362
ORDER1. The petitioner (disputantsociety ) has filed this writ petition against the judgement dated 7-10-1976 passed by the Maharastra Sate Co-operative Appellate Court in Appeal No. 460 of 1973 arising out of the dispute No. 7 of 1973 decided on 30-4-1973 by Officeron Special Duty, Nominee of the District Deputy Registrar, Co-operativeSocieties.2. The petitioner filed a suit againstrespondent 1 and 2 . It is stated that respondent1 and 2 served with the petitioner as a cashier since 1947. It is stated that respondent 1 d defalcatedfunds of the societyto the extent of Rs. 26.302,50ps. According to the to the petitioner, respondent1 used this amount for his personal puprpsoe. It is stated that his defalcation was detected sometime before 29-6-1971, when respondent 1 disclosed to the office bearers of the petitioner society that the actual cashin hand was short by Rs. 26.00|- It is stated that this defalcation this amount even long before that. However, many times he used to bring amount...
Hareshwar Hiraji Desai and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-14-1983
Reported in: 1984(1)BomCR290
Sujata V. Manohar, J.1. The petitioners are Assistant Commissioners in the Food and Drugs Administration, Government of Maharashtra. The 1st petitioner Hareshwar Hiraji Desai joined the Food and Drugs Administration in 1962. Prior to 30th April, 1982 he was designated as a Chief Inspector. Under an order dated 30-4-1982 the 1st petitioner was posted as Assistant Commissioner in Greater Bombay.2. The 2nd petitioner Sudhakar Gangadhar Pathak joined the Food and Drugs Administration in 1968. Prior to 30-4-1982 he was posted in Thane as a Chief Inspector. Under an order of 30-4-1982 the 2nd petitioner was transferred to Bombay and posted as an Assistant Commissioner. The 3rd petitioner Anil Shantaram Dani joined the Food and Drugs Administration in the year 1970. Prior to 30-4-1982 he was posted as a Chief Inspector in Bombay. Under an order to 30-4-1982 he was transferred to Bombay head quarters and posted as an Assistant Commissioner. Thereafter the petitioners were working as Assistant ...
Voras Exclusive Tools (P.) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-11-1983
Reported in: (1984)7ITD620(Mum.)
1. These seven appeals, relating to the assessment years 1971-72 to 1977-78, filed by the assessee-company against the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) deal with a similar issue and are, therefore, for the sake of convenience, disposed of by a consolidated order.2. The assessee is a limited company. We were given to understand at the time of hearing of the appeals that Shri Laldas Jamnadas Vora was the chairman of the company, while the brother Shri Dhirendralal Kantilal Vora and the son of Shri Laldas Jamnadas Vora, Shri Umeshlal Vora, were the managing directors of the company. In July 1978, as part of family arrangement, it was decided that Shri Laldas Jamnadas Vora, Shri Dhirendralal Kantilal Vora and Shri Umeshlal Vora, who were, as already described, the chairman and managing directors, respectively of the company, will go out of the company and in consideration thereof the assessee-company transferred certain machinery for manufacturing valve seal rings to Voras Engineering...
D. Navinchandra and Co. Vs. K.V. Seshadri, Cci and E
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-11-1983
Reported in: 1989(40)ELT320(Bom)
1. The controversy in this petition stands concluded by my decision dated November 26, 1982 in Misc. Petition No. 1458 of 1979 Narendra Mafatlal Mehta v. Union of India. In view of that judgment, the rule in this petition is also required to be made absolute and the orders dated August 16, 1978 and October 25, 1978 are quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to issue to the petitioner Export House Certificate under the Import Policy of April 1978 - March 1979 within a period of one month from today. The grant of Export House Certificate would entitle the petitioners to seek certain facilities as provided by paragraph 174 of the scheme. As the time for making the application for additional licence has already expired, it is directed that in case the petitioners make an application within a period of three months from the date of grant of Export House Certificate, then the respondents shall consider it on merits and do the needful. In the circumstances of the case, there will...
Vijaykumar J. Sanghani Vs. Second Income-tax Officer.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-11-1983
Reported in: [1986]17ITD804(Mum)
ORDERPer Shri I. S. Nigam, Accountant Member - This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the AAC, T-Range, Bombay.2. The assessee is an individual and the appeal relates to the assessment year 1978-79. The assessment for this year was completed by the ITO under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act), and in the notice of demand accompanying the assessment order, the assessee was intimated that the assessee was also charged interest under section 139(8) of the Act for not filing an advance tax estimate. The assessee, therefore, moved a petition for rectification under section 154 of the Act for cancelling the interest charged under section 139(8) and section 217. The ITO, however, by order under section 154 rejected the assessees application under section 154. The AAC in appeal, agreed with the ITO on the issue and refused to interfere. The assessee has, therefore, come up in the present appeal before us.3. The assessees learned counsel Shri Mapara cited...
Sharda Prasad Singh Vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1983
Reported in: II(1984)ACC208; [1986]59CompCas782(Bom)
Dharmadhikari J.1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant against the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Alibag, dated September 30, 1981, in Special Civil Suit No. 26 of 1976 direction the appellant-original defendant No. 1 to pay an amount of Rs. 72,176.49 towards the claim made by the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation arising out of an accident in which th Ambassador car of the Corporation was badly damaged and two of its employees died on of the Corporation was badly damaged and two of its employees kind on the spot and the third one suffered certain injuries. It is not disputed that on March 15, 1978, Sarvashri Shirodkar and Sawant were in the car belonging to the Corporation and Shri Muley was at the wheel. According to the plaintiff-Corporation, the car was being driven with due care and in a moderate speed obeying all the relevant rules and regulations. When it came near milestone No. 137/6 on Bombay-Konkan Goa Road in village Lohar Mal...
Sharda Prasad Singh Vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Bom441; 1984(1)BomCR105; 1984MhLJ199
Dharmadhikari, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant aginst the judgment and decree passed by the Civil judge, Senior Divison, Alibag, dt, 30th Sept. 1981 in Special Civil Suit No. 26 of 1979 directing the appellant-original defendant 1 to pay an mount of Rs. 72, 176-49 Ps. Towards the claim made by the Maharashtra State Road Transport which the Ambassador car of the Corporation arising out of an accident out of an accident in which the ambassador car of the Corporation was Badly damaged and tow of its employees died on the spot and the third on suffered certain injuries. It is not disputed that on 15 th MaR. 1978 Sarvashri Shirodkar and Sawant were in the car belonging to the Corporation and Shri Muley was at the wheel. According to the plaintiff-Corporation, the car was being driven with due care and in a moderate speed obeying all the relevant rules and regulations. When it came near mile Stone No. 137/6 on Bombay............. in village Lohar Mal, there was a narrow culvert...
Kapil P. Mohmed Vs. S. Anthony
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1983
Reported in: 1984(2)BomCR199
Sharad Manohar, J.1. This contempt processing was required to be instituted on account of the gross kind of contempt which, according to the respondent, he is entitled to commit by telling the Court that he is entitled to flout the order of the Court with impunity. The facts which will be presently mentioned will reveal the gross character of the contempt.2. The petitioner before me is the plaintiff in the suit filed by him in the City Civil Court against the present respondent who is the defendant in the said suit. For the sake of convenience the parties will be referred to hereafter as the 'plaintiff' and the 'defendant'. The plaintiff is a lessee of a portion of the land belonging to the Bombay Port Trust, near the Clock Tower, at the entrance of Sasoon Dock, Colaba, Bombay. On the portion of the said land he has constructed shops and, according to him, he was conducting his fish business in one of the shops in the name and style M/s. General Fisheries (India). According to the plai...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »