Mumbai Court November 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.
Northern Sales Co. Ltd. Vs. Reliable Extraction Industries Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-19-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Bom332; ILR1985Bom1945
1. By this petition filed under Section 5(1) of the Foreign Awards (Recognition and Enforcement) Act, 1961, the petitioner is requesting that the award dated July 10, 1980 be filed in Court and the judgment to pronounced in accordance with the award. The fact giving rise to the filing of the petition are not in dispute and are required to be briefly stated to appreciate the relief's sought by the petitioner.2. The petitioner is a Company incorporated under the laws of Manotoba, Canada, and carries on business as exporters of oilseeds; while the respondent is a company incorporated in India and carries on business as importer of oilseeds. By contract dated June 23, 1978 the petitioner agreed to sell to the respondent 1000 Metric tons of No. 1 Canadian Rapeseed 5 percent more or less at Sellers' option. The price was United States Dollars 285 per metric ton, in bulk, cost, insurance and freight, Bombay Free Out. The contract stipulated that the discharge rate at Bombay would be minimum o...
Standard Drum and Barrel Mfg. Co. Vs. Regional Director, E.S.i. Corp.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-19-1984
Reported in: 1985(2)BomCR190; (1984)86BOMLR673
C.S. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the Standard Drum and Barrels Manufacturing Co. Bombay against the order passed by the Employees Insurance Court at Bombay in application (ESI) 38 of 1981 decided on 30th July, 1982 rejecting the application filed by the company under section 75 of the Act, i.e. Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, for setting aside the order passed by the Regional Director, E.S.I. Bombay levying damages under section 85-B of the Act.2. It is an admitted position that notices were issued to the appellant company under section 85-B of the Act. According to the corporation the appellant employer is a chronic defaulter in payment of contribution as per the provisions of section 40 of the E.S.I. Act read with Regulations Nos. 29, 31, 34 and 26 of the E.S.I. (General) Regulations, 1950. Therefore, the corporation issues 3 notices dated 7th January, 1980, 9th July, 1980 and 1st January, 1981 being notices Nos. 5, 6 and 7 for defaults Nos. 14 to 23 proposin...
Zenith Electronics Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-17-1984
Reported in: (1986)(25)ELT746Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The prayer in this application is for condonation of delay in filing the Appeal C.D.(Bom) No. 687/84. The application is by a partner of M/s. Mulla & Mulla and Craigie Blunt & Caroe, Advocates for the Applicants.2. Among other things it was stated in the application that the appeal was inadvertently filed in the Office of the Appellate Collector of Customs on 14-5-1984 alongwith the Solicitors' forwarding letter dated 14-5-1984. The mistaken presentation of the appeal in the Office of the Appellate Collector was sought to be explained by stating that inadvertently the applicants' Solicitors forwarding letter of 14th May, 1984 was addressed to the Appellate Collector of Customs. Accordingly, the applicants' Solicitors despatch clerk sent the appeal through the peon.to the Office of the Appellate Collector of Customs. It was further stated in the application that in or about the fourth week of July, 1984, the applicants' Solicitors intended to send the compilation to the Offi...
Kanchan Kumar Dhar, Official Liquidator (as Liquidator of Star of Coch ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-17-1984
Reported in: [1986]60CompCas746(Bom); [1984]149ITR594a(Bom)
Parekh, J.1. This judge's summons has been taken out by the official liquidator, inter alia, for a declaration that the transaction entered into between respondent No. 1 and the company (prior to the order of winding-up) is void and, in the circumstances, respondent No. 1 be directed to hand over the premises in question to the official liquidator. The judge's summons is resisted by respondent No. 1 only although the other respondents have been served.2. The facts that give rise to this judge's summons are that the company being the Star of Cochin Chit Schemes Pvt. Ltd. owns a building known as 'Star of Cochin Building' at Bhandarkar Road, Matunga, Bombay - 400019. This second floor of the said building consists of 10 rooms. Five of these rooms were let out to one Mrs. Devki Amma, mother of one of the directors of the said company. The other five rooms were in possession and/or in use and occupation of the company itself. On July 7, 1978, a winding up petition was filed. It appears tha...
Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Suman Navnath Rajguru ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-17-1984
Reported in: [1986]60CompCas743(Bom)
Vaze, J.1. Navnath Ambadas Rajguru, a young man of 21, was engaged in the business of manufacturing footwear. On May 27, 1979, Navnath was walking to his residence along Sion-Trombay road from west to east. When he reached Bharat Petroleum's petrol pump, a tanker bearing registration No. MHT 4431, which was parked near the footpath, burst and exploded as a result of which Navnath was thrown up and sustained serious injuries. Navnath later on succumbed to his injuries and his wife, Suman, father, Ambadas, and mother, Laxmibai, filed a claim application No. 2016 of 1979, before the II Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for Greater Bombay which awarded a sum of Rs. 47,175 as compensation against which the present appeal has been filed by the insurance company.2. On behalf of the company, it is urged, firstly, that the insurance policy only covers liability which may be incurred by the owner in respect of death or fatal injury to a third party 'caused by or arising out of the use of...
Noble Paints and Varnish Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-17-1984
Reported in: 1985(6)ECC64
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. This petition concerns the interpretation of an exemption notification issued under the provisions of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The notification is dated 30th April, 1975 and reads thus: In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the Central Government hereby exempts goods falling under Item No. 68 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944) manufactured in a factory as a job work from so much of the duty of excise leviable thereon as is in excess of the duty calculated on the basis of the amouNt charged for the job work. Explanation.--For the purposes of the notification, the expression, 'job work' shall mean such items of work where an article intended to undergo manufacturing process is supplied to the job worker and that article is returned by the job worker to the supplier after the article has undergone the intended manufacturing process on charging only for the job wor...
Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Suman Navnath Rajguru ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-17-1984
Reported in: 1(1986)ACC372
V.V. Vaze, J.1. Navnath Ambadas Rajguru a young man of 21 was engaged in the business of manufacturing footwear. On 27-5-1979 Navnath was walking to his residence along Sion-Trombay road from west to east When he reached Bharat Petroleum's petrol pump a tanker bearing registration No. MHT-4431, which was parked near the footpath, burst and exploded as a result of which Navnath was thrown up and sustained serious injuries. Navnath later on succumbed to his injuries and his wife Suman, father Ambadas and mother Laxmibai filed a claim application No. 2016 of 1979 before the II Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for Greater Bombay which awarded a sum of Rs. 47,175-00 as compensation against which the present appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company.2. On behalf of the company it is urged firstly that the insurance policy only covers liability which may be incurred by the owner in respect of death or fatal injury to a third party 'caused by arising out of a use of the vehicle i...
Commissioner of Sales Tax, Maharashtra State, Bombay Vs. Concord Light ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-1984
Reported in: [1985]156ITR54(Bom); [1985]59STC239(Bom)
Smt. Sujata V. Manohar, J.1. The respondents manufacture various types of lamp shades. They manufacture a kind of lamp shade called 'multigrove'. By an application dated 25th August, 1973 the respondents applied to the Commissioner of Sales Tax for determination of the correct rate of tax payable on the sales of multigrove surface silver (item No. 8301 in the catalogue) and multigrove V/D silver (item No. 8702 in the catalogue) which were effected under an invoice dated 30th July, 1973. This determination was sought under section 52 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. The Commissioner of Sales Tax held that the sales in question were liable to tax under entry 15(1) of Schedule E to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 as then in force, and not under entry 7A of Schedule E to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 as then in force.2. Being aggrieved by the decision of the Commissioner of Sales Tax the respondents filed a first appeal before the Tribunal. The articles in question as also the literature...
ishwarlal J. Naik Vs. Development Commissioner Cum Secretary, Edu. Dep ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-1984
Reported in: 1985(1)BomCR138
D.M. Rege, J. 1. This petition by a Lecturer in Government College, Daman, can be disposed on an extremely short point.2. The petitioner was a Lecturer in Class I gazetted post in the Government Arts and Science College, Daman, in the pay scale of Rs. 400-950 after being selected for the same. The said pay scale was revised on 1st May, 1975, to Rs. 700-40-900-EB-40-1100-50-1300. On that date he was also to cross the Efficiency Bar, On 22-7-1974 a penalty of withholding one increment was imposed on him. On his representations to the President of India, the President of India by his order dated 31-3-1977 had set aside the said penalty. In this case we are not much concerned with the said order of the President. It is not disputed that on 1st May, 1975, the petitioner was entitled to cross the Efficiency Bar. According to him, he was not given any increment due to him on 1st May, 1975, nor the second increment falling due to him on 1st May, 1976. Admittedly, he was not intimated about any...
Peeraj Trade Linkers Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-1984
Reported in: 1989(20)LC57(Bombay)
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. This writ petition seeks to quash an assessment order made by the Customs authorities on 10th April 1981 in so far as it pertains to additional duty upon aluminium scrap imported by the petitioners.2. The petitioners imported 46.940 metric tonnes of aluminium scrap and filed a bill of entry for the same on 2nd April 1981 through their clearing agents. The respondents assessed additional duty upon the aluminium scrap at the rate of 24 per cent ad valorem.3. Section 2 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, provides that the rates at which Customs duty shall be levied under the Customs Act, 1962, are specified in the First and Second Schedules thereof. Under Section 3, 'Any article which is imported into India shall, in addition, be liable to a duty ...equal to the excise duty for the time being leviable on a like article if produced or manufactured in India'. The Section explains that the expression 'the excise duty for the time being leviable on a like article if produced ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »