Mumbai Court April 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.
Neeta Deelip Kumar Suchak Vs. Deelip Kumar Mohan Lal Suchak and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Bom235; 1984(1)BomCR222
1. The Petitioner herein, Neeta Deelipkumar Suchak, has filed, this Petition in forma pauperis against her husband-Respondent No. 1 her husband's three brothers--Respondents Nos. 2. 3 & 5 as also against her father-in-law Respondent No. 4. and two Companies--Respondents Nos. 6 and 7, being the partnership Firms of Respondent Nos. 1 to 5. The Petitioner has sprayed firstly that she may be permitted to sue in forma pauperis; Secondly that, the Respondents Nos. 1 to 5 be ordered and decreed to pay the Petitioner a sum of Rs. 5,000/- per month from the date of the petition; thirdly, the petitioner prays for a decree against the Respondent for the sum of Rs. 27,528/- together with interest thereon at the rate of 18 percent per annum from 21-10-1979 till payment; fourthly the Petitioner has prayed that Respondents Nos. 1 to 5 be ordered to return to the petitioner articles and things mentioned in Exhibit 'D' to the Petition, or in the alternative, in the event of Respondents Nos. 1 to 5 fail...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Vishwanathrao Parshuram Mali
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Bom313; 1983(2)BomCR19
Dharmadhijkari, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the State Government against the Award passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Sangli dated 2nd January, 1980 in the Land Acquisition Case No. 4 of 1976. It is an admitted position that at the instance of the Municipal Council, Tasgaon the land belonging to Respondent Vishwanathrao Parshuram Mali bearing C. T. S. No. 1588 was acquired for the purpose of a vegetable market. The notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 14th of May 1972. The respondent-claimant had protested against the acquisition itself. However, his objection was overruled. Ultimately land came to be acquired and the Land Acquisition Officer by his Award dated 17-2-1975 determined the compensation at the rate of Rs. 17-50 per square meter. Being aggrieved by this Award the claimant sought a reference under Section 13 of the Land Acquisition Act and the Civil Court by the impugned award determined the compensation at the rate of Rs. ...
Bhoja Babu Salian Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-07-1983
Reported in: 1983(2)BomCR165
1. The short question involved in this revision application is as to whether without an order of forfeiture of a bond executed by a surety the issuance of notice of show cause will be without jurisdiction. The said question arises on the following facts of this case.2. The petitioner, Bhoja Babu Salian, stood surety in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- for an accused, Mohamed Zamil Mohamed A. Chaudhary, in case No. 341/PN/82 in the Court of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 9th Court, Bandra, Bombay. The said surety bond was executed by the petitioner on June 10, 1982. It was for appearance of the accused in the said case. The accused failed to appear in the Court on June 30, 1982. On that day the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate passed the following order :'Accused Nos. 1 and 3 produced. Accused No. 2 absent. Issue non-bailable warrant against accused No. 2 and notice to surety. R/f (that is, returnable) 6-7-1982.'In pursuance of the aforesaid order a notice to the s...
Madhukar Akhand Vs. Bhima Akhand and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-07-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Bom489; 1983(85)ARBLR291(Bom)
ORDER1. A question of law of some importance and of common occurrence of late has been raised in this petition. The petitioner is the husband who aggrieved by an order of interim maintenance passed by the Third Joint Civil Judge, (Junior Division), Nagpur in Regular Civil Suit No. 466 of 1981 has approached this Court. the order by which he is aggrieved passed below Exhibit-7 directs him to pay interim maintenance in a sum of Rs. 200/- performance month for the plaintiffs from the date of filing of the suit till the date of the disposal of the suit.2. The suit was brought by plaintiff Bhima, the wife of defendant Madhukar for herself and on behalf of her two minor children, plaintiffs 2 and 3 Satish and Dilip, aged 5 and 4 years respectively. She claimed maintenance from the husband on the ground that the husband had deserted her and her children and was not looking after them and maintaining them' that he had a kept mistress by name Kalavati with whom he is residing in the family hous...
Bhagwandas and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-07-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Bom471; 1983MhLJ825
ORDER1. Heart of the question is whether in determining the extent of the total holdings under the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short), the consideration of the requirement of making provision for the expenses for marriage and/or maintenance of unmarried major daughter in a general partition in a Hindu family has any place.2. Petitioner 1 Bhagwandas Heda's Joint family consists of his wife Smt. Kamlabai (petitioner 2). three minor sons: Amritlal (petitioner 3), Tarachand (petitioner 4) and HemantKumar, two minor unmarried daughter : Premalatha and Hemalata and a major unmarried daughter Kiran. Bhagwandas as the held of the family filed a return of total holdings as required under Section 12 of the Act. On making enquiry, the SLDT found 34.24 acres as surplus. In appeal the MRT maintained this order. Being aggrieved, the present petition under Article 226 of the constitution has been filed.3. Two points were originally raised in this peti...
The Executive Engineer, Electrical Division Vs. Prakash S/O. Devidas K ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-07-1983
Reported in: (1983)85BOMLR270; 1983MhLJ615
Jamdar, J.1. The question that falls for consideration in this writ petition is whether the retrenchment effected without complying with the procedure prescribed by Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act amounts to unfair labour practice within the meaning of item 1(f) of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Unfair Labour Practices Act).2. The respondent was employed on daily wages of Rs. 8.10 as an assistant wireman in the electrical division of the Public Works and Health Department at Nagpur from September 19, 1980 to August 31, 1981. His services were dispensed with from August 31, 1981 in order to accommodate the candidates recommended by the employment exchange as required by rules. The respondent filed a complaint application under Section 28 of the Unfair Labour Practices Act read with item 1(a)(b) and (f) of Schedule IV, challenging the termination of his services on t...
Vijay Devji Aiya Vs. University of Bombay and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-06-1983
Reported in: 1983(1)BomCR2
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. The petitioner appeared for the L.L.B. degree (3rd L.L.B.) examination held by the University of Bombay, the 1st respondent, in April 1982. On 29th July, 1982 the results of the examination were declared. The petitioner was shown to have failed in the examination. A few days later received his marks-sheet which showed that he had obtained 48 out of 100 in the Trade Marks and Patents and 31 out of 100 in the Drafting, Pleading and conveyancing Papers. It showed also that he had received 276 out of 600 marked as his grand-total and had, therefore failed.2. On 8th August, 1982, the petitioner applied to the University of revaluation of the said two papers. It was only by its later dated 7th December, 1982 that the University informed the petitioner that, upon revaluation of his marks in the said two papers, he was found to get 59 out of 100 marks in the Trade Marks and Patents paper and 44 out of 100 marks in the Drafting, Pleading and Conveyancing paper. Accordingly, ...
Manganese Ore (India) Limited Vs. the Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-05-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC998DTri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal under Section 129-A of the Customs Act, 1962 filed by M/s. Manganese Ore (India) Ltd., against the order No. S/IO-1O2/82F dated 27.5.82 of the Addl. Collector of Customs, Bombay, confiscating 104 Drums of Atomised Ferro Silicon valued at Rs. 104,804/- and allowing them to be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 30,0C0/-. The appellants contend that the order is not correct as the import of Atomised Ferro Silicon is permitted under O.G.L. under Appendix 10 Sr.No. 8. In support of this contention they have relied on the classification given to them in letter No. PD-2 2 /81 dt. 12.1.82 from the Department of Steel, Govt. of India, New Delhi, stating that Atomised Ferro Silicon cannot be imported under O.G.L. The appellants contend that this clarification has to be treated as authentic in terms of instructions contained at paras 52 and 205 of the Import Policy. The appellants further point out that the goods in question were required for research purpose and hence the a...
Antu Mahadu Dhavade Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-05-1983
Reported in: 1983(2)BomCR414
Sharad Manohar, J.1. The appellant before us is an old man, 68 years of age, who has been convicted for offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to imprisonment for life by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune.2. As will be presently pointed out, the evidence led by the prosecution cannot sustain the order of conviction passed by the learned Judge and all the same for a period of nearly 3 years this old man has been languishing in jail. We cannot help feeling deepest regrets for the accused on this account.3. The prosecution case, which is based mainly on one of the several documents posing as dying declarations, is as follows :---The accused was 65 years of age on the date of the trial. His only married son Ankush and daughter-in-law, who is deceased in the instant case, lived in the village Kondhave which is at a distance of about 9 miles from the city of Pune. The accused works as a labourer. On the day of the incident, that is to say, on 24-7...
Pune Municipal Corporation Vs. Keshav Ganpat Bhise and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-05-1983
Reported in: 1983(2)BomCR715
V.S. Kotwal, J.1. After facing a departmental enquiry and getting himself exonerated, further proceeding has been initiated by the respondent herein for the recovery of certain amount pertaining to the period of suspension. The respondent was employed by the petitioner-Corporation on April 14, 1969 in the capacity as a Mixer Driver in Roads Division. On account of certain allegations about the misconduct on his part, with which we are not much concerned in this proceeding, he was suspended as and from January 16, 1978, in pursuance of the directions to hold departmental enquiry. The Enquiry Officer was appointed as late as on 1st July, 1978. Show-cause notice was issued on 31st January, 1979. The enquiry was concluded in due course when the respondent, the alleged delinquent was exonerated of all charges. In pursuance of this order he was directed on 7th March, 1979 to resume duties as the stigma was wiped out. He actually resumed the duty as and from 13th March, 1979. He was paid 50% ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »