Mumbai Court January 1984 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.
The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs. Govind V. Pethe
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-25-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Bom411
1. A tragic accident took place at the inter-section of Lady Jamshedji Road and Dr. Ambedkar Road at 5.30 p.m. on 10th May 1971. Scooterist Pethe, a lecturer in a College at Baroda with his wife on the pillion seat was coming from Parsi Colony. Wanted to cross Ambedkar Road and proceed towards Hindu Colony. Ambedkar Road is a wide bisected road with each side having a width of 20 metres and the central reservation track is 4.5 meters wide.2. A. B. E. S. T. double decker No. MRT 1967 was proceeding from King's Circle towards south. Pethe had traversed practically 2/3rd of the road when the front portion of the bus hit him. The bus driver tried to sweve his vehicle on the right and applied the brakes. The bus skidded a distance of 6 metres and came to a halt. Mrs. Pethe was killed and her husband the applicant Govind suffered injuries resulting in disabililty.3. Govind Pethe filed two applications before the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal for Greater Bombay, which awarded Rs....
J.M. Baxi and Co. Vs. Gowri Shankar, Dy. Collector of Customs and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-25-1984
Reported in: 1989(20)LC478(Bombay)
Bharucha, J.1. The petitioners are agents in Bombay for foreign ship-owners. They were agents for the vessel m.v. 'KOST1S PROIS'. The vessel arrived in Bombay carrying 21,000 long tonnes of shredded scrap as bulk cargo. On 16th December 1978 the vessel commenced discharge. The discharge was interrupted by a port strike. It was completed on 14th April ly79. The charter party for the vessel stipulated that draught surveys would be made at the port of loading and the port of discharge. A draught survey was made at Bombay on 24th April 1979 by Ericson & Richards (Surveyors) Pvt. Ltd. which showed that the vessel had discharged 21,482.85 long tonnes. The Bombay Port Trust issued an out-turn report in respect of the vessel which, since it was carrying bulk cargo, showed the out-turn as nil, the shortage as nil and the excess as nil.2 On 18th April 1980 the petitioners received a communication dated 14th April 1980 from the Assistant Collector of Customs, By it the petitioners were informed o...
Dr. Vivekanand Atmaram Chitale and Another Vs. Vidya Vardhini Sabha an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1984
Reported in: 1984MhLJ520
Jamdar, J.1. Writ Petition No. 3680 of 1983 filed by the Petitioners for seeking various reliefs against the Respondents was by an order passed on 21-10-1983 treated as a contempt petition under S. 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. By the same order notices were issued only to Respondents Nos. 2, 4, 5, 6 and 12 and the writ petition filed by the Petitioners was rejected in limine, restricting the charge of contempt only against the said Respondents.2. Contempt complained of is of the order dated 3rd October, 1983 passed by the President, Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in an appeal preferred by Petitioners, being aggrieved by the order of the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Jalgaon, refusing to grant interim injunction during the pendency of the application filed by the Petitioners under S. 51 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950.3. Petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 were the members of the governing council of Vidya Vardhini Sabha, a public trust registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Ac...
Advani Oerlikon Ltd. and Another Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1984
Reported in: 1984(16)ELT27(Bom)
Chandurkar, C.J.1. The simple question which arises in this petition is whether the petitioner No. 1 is entitled to claim a deduction in respect of the items specified in paragraph 6 of the petition as post-manufacturing expenses. The heads under which these deductions are sought were :(a) Freight from the Factory to Area Office and Customers, (b) Area Office (Sales Depot) Expenses, (c) Sales Promotion Expenses, (d) Interest on the finished goods and on book debts, and (e) Trading Selling Profits.2. The claim for deduction in respect of all the above items having been rejected by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, this petition has been filed by the petitioners.3. It is well-known not that by virtue of the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India and others v. Bombay Tyres International Pvt. Ltd. - 1983 Excise Law Times 1896, the whole law regarding deductions permissible by way of post-manufacturing expenses has undergone a radical change. The petitioners' contention be...
C.N. Bhaskaran Vs. S.A. Patil, Presiding Officer Labour Court, Bombay ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1984
Reported in: (1984)86BOMLR204; [1985(51)FLR530]; (1984)ILLJ436Bom
1. The interpretation of S. 38B of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act. 1948, falls for consideration in this petition.2. The petitioner was employed as a stenographer by the second respondent. On 20th March, 1978 he was placed under suspension and chargesheet was served upon him on 22nd May, 1978. In respect of suspension for the period between 20th March, 1978 and 30th April, 1978 the petitioner filed an application before the Labour Court under S. 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act on 22nd November, 1979. These was granted to him. On 13th June, 1978 he filed a second application for suspension wages between 1st and 31st May, 1978 and, during its pendency, he filed a third application for suspension wages between 1st June, 1978 and 31st October, 1979. These were disposed of by a common order on 18th March, 1980 by the first respondent.3. It was contended on behalf of the second respondent before the Labour Court that by virtue of the inclusion of S. 38B in the Bombay Shops and...
Ramchandra Shankar Khaire and ors. Vs. Sarjerao Bajirao Jagtap
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Bom113
1. This appeal raises a short point as to whether a Probate Court could go into the question of the possible effect which a Will if given effect to might have as respects the provisions of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act regarding the sale of land to a non-agriculturist.2. The villagers of Supe Khandu Khairayachi Wadi. Taluka Baramati. District Poona claiming to be the executors of the Will of one Tanubai made an application under S. 226 of the Indian Succession Act for grant of Probate of the Will in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune. He framed as many as eight issues covering the entire spectrum of the dispute regarding the alleged fraud practised on the testatrix. Regarding the validity of the Will he framed an issue 5A as follows :--'Whether the Will in question is valid and legal in view of the provisions of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act?'3. Treating this issue as a preliminary one, the Court found that if the provisions of the will are ...
Patiram Budharao Pimpalkar Vs. Mohammed Usman
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Bom364; (1983)86BOMLR480
ORDER1. This is landlords petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution for quashing the order pssed by the Resident Deputy Colletor, rejecting his application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before hi,.2. the petitioner had filed an applicaiton before the Rent Controller for grant of permission to terminate the lease of the respondent under clause 13(3) (vi) of the Rent control Order. The argument were heard by the Rent controller on 25-1-1982 and the case was posted for orders on 6-2-1982. The order was passed by the Rent Controller on 6-2-1982 but as none turned up he directed the order to be communicated to theparties. It appears from the proceedings that the Attorney of the Counsel for the landlord appeared on 2-3-1982 and signed the order sheet of those proceedings. There is nothing to show that any communication as such was sent by the Rent Controller to the parties after having passed the order on 6-2-1982.3. An applicaiton for certified copy of the impugned order w...
Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilizers Limited Vs. Mohindersingh and Co. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1984
Reported in: (1984)86BOMLR212; 1984MhLJ491
Lentin, J.1. Is the award liable to be set aside on the ground of legal or factual misconduct on the part of the arbitrator? Such is the essential nature of the controversy in this appeal.2. A brief narration of facts : --3.(A) The appellant is a wholly owned Government concern. The 1st respondent - firm (referred to hereafter as 'the contractor') carries on business as civil and structural engineers and contractors. (B) A contract was entered into between the parties whereby the contractor agreed to carry out certain civil and structural work in respect of certain plants to be erected at Thal. Work commenced in July 1980. Differences arose between the parties. The work came to a standstill in February 1982. The appellant terminated the contract. (C) In June 1982 the contractor filed a petition against the appellant in this Court under S. 20 of the Arbitration Act. On 9th July 1982 parties filed consent terms. They provided inter alia that (i) certain joint measurements were to be take...
Nana Ramchandra Jadhav Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-1984
Reported in: 1984(1)BomCR453
1. This is a jail appeal preferred by the appellant-accused No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the 'appellant') challenging the judgment and order dated 22-1-1982 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, in Sessions Case No. 438 of 1980 convicting and sentencing him for an offence of rape punishable under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the 'Penal Code') to rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 3 1/2 years.2. The appellant was charged along with three others for committing various offences. The allegations were that he and one more, on or about 30-5-1980 at about 11.00 a.m. at B.D.D. Chawl No. 8, N. M. Joshi Marg, Bombay, kidnapped Kum. Alka Vasudeo Rana, a minor girl under 18 years of age, from lawful guardianship of her mother Smt. Pramila Vasudeo Rana, an offence punishable under Section 363 r/w. Section 34 of the Penal Code, and two other ac...
Muar Ramchandra Joshi Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-1984
Reported in: 1985(1)BomCR319; [1987(54)FLR723]
S.P. Bharucha J.1. The petitioner was employed by the Life Insurance Corporation of India, the 1st respondent, as an Assistant Engineer at Calcutta. On 30th October, 1970 he was promoted to the pose of Assistant Executive Engineer at Bombay. On 15th February, 1977 he was served with a charge sheet which alleged that he had recommended 2 interim bills dated 17th June and 20th July, 1974 and a final bill dated 30th September, 1974 of the L.I.C.'s contractors, M/s. National Painting Works, for the work of cleaning doors and windows 'without actually verifying whether the work had been done or not which has resulted in payments being made to the contractors for work not done by them'. The petitioner denied the charges. The Managing Director of the L.I.C., as the disciplinary authority, appointed one S. Balachandran, enquiry officer to enquire into the charges. The enquiry was held and the enquiry officer submitted his report. On 3rd July, 1980 the disciplinary authority passed an order whi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »