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.
Hari Shrawan Sutar Vs. Ramdas Tukaram Patil
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-12-1984
Reported in: 1985(2)BomCR290; 1985MhLJ197
B.A. Masodkar, J. 1. This civil revision application question an order permitting a special Mukhatyar one Dr. D.M. Patil to be examined after the respondent plaintiff had taken the oath and all the dates of further hearing was unable to attend the Court because of his illness that was certified to be so by a medical practitioner.2. In this Court, Mr. Sawant, the learned Counsel appearing in support of the civil revision application, relied on the provisions of Order 18, Rule 3-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') and submitted that this course was contrary to that rule and that the order impugned should be set aside.3. Now, this civil revision application is pending in this Court for more than three months and by the time this is being disposed of, surely, the respondent-plaintiff should be available, unless prevented by some other reason.4. The provisions of Rule 3-A of Order 18 of the Code were inserted by Amending Act No. 104 of 1976 to the ...
Maharasthra State Road Transport Corpn. Vs. Shobhana Hemchand Sheth an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-12-1984
Reported in: 2(1985)ACC306
V.V. Vaze, J.1. On 24-6-1974 a scooter being driven by Kishore and having Uday as a pillion driver crossed the railway over bridge near Mal-Bungalow on Madhavnagar-Sangli road. Bus No. MHO-9780 owned by the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation and driven by Ghodake followed the scooter. Both the vehicles had to traverse the bridge running north-south of which 250 feet were on the upwards gradient and after the vehicles reached the top of the bridge, they had to descend a like length. Driver Ghodake saw the scooter ahead of him, blew the horn to warn the scooterist but it appears that the bus dashed against the scooter throwing the driver Kishore on the eastern side of the road while pillion driver Uday was thrown towards the western side. Kishore escaped with minor abrasions but Uday was not that lucky and died on the spot.2. Uday's mother Shobhana and her three daughters filed a suit in the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Sangli at Sangli for damages and as the Cour...
Munira Mohamed Sadique Bhiman Vs. Mohamed YasIn Mohamed Sadique Patel ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1984
Reported in: 1985(1)BomCR304
M.M. Qazi, J.1. The petitioner is wife of respondent No.1. They were married on 10-5-1979 at Bombay. The petitioner went to village Taloja, Taluka : Panvel, District : Raigad and started living with the respondent No.1. For few months, they lived happily but thereafter, the relations became strained. It is alleged that after about eight months, respondent No.1 started harassing the petitioner and some times even assaulted her at the instance of his parents. The petitioner gave birth to a female child on 11-12-1980 at Cama Hospital, Bombay, who was named as Yasmin. After the delivery, the petitioner stayed with her mother for about 4 to 5 months, and thereafter, she was taken to Taloja by the respondent No.1. According to the petitioner, on or about 17th April, 1981, her brother visited Taloja to invite her for a marriage in the family. At that time, the respondent No.1 did not allow the petitioner to accompany her brother and instead asked him to come to Taloja on or about 10th or 11th...
Escorts Ltd. and Another Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-09-1984
Reported in: [1985]57CompCas241(Bom)
Madhava Reddy, C.J.1. The questions that arise for consideration in this writ petition filed by Escorts Ltd. and its shareholder and managing director are quite unique and important. The decision thereon may affect not only the petitioner-company but the entire corporate sector and the public financial institutions. Naturally, this writ petition has attracted considerable public attention both lay and legal. Quite a few facts are required to notice to appreciate the issue canvassed in this case. Though inferences sought to be down and the conclusions sought to be pressed by the parties form the facts leading to the filing of this writ petition differ, the facts themselves in the ultimate analysis are not very much in dispute.2. Till 1980, among the non-residents, only individuals of Indian nationality origin were given the facility to invest in Indian Industries; not the companies. The Government of India was eager to attract larger foreign remittances into India. In a report of the Wo...
The Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Juliana M. D'souz ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-09-1984
Reported in: I(1985)ACC501; AIR1986Bom25
Vaze, J.1. Benjamin D'Souza was travelling by a car No. MRS 7120 belonging to one Shri Karbari Khashaba Desai to Nasik as he had to attend to electrical wiring work at Nasik. Benjamin was sitting on the front seat by the left side of the driver and the car dashed against a truck No. MHT 3589 driven by Defendant No.2 Jagdeev Bachansingh Sardar and owned by Defendant No.1 Gurunamsingh Bhajansingh. As a result of the impact Benjamin died and his mother Juliana M. D'souza filed a suit in the Court of the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thane, for damages, which, having been decreed at Rs. 70,000/- the Insurance Company appeals.2. It is a remarkable feature of the suit that neither the owner of the truck nor the driver put in any appearance and hence Mr. Gumaste, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company, has attacked the finding of the lower Court only so far as it relates to the question of quantum of compensation. It appears that the lower Court followed a thum...
Savitri Devi Obhan and anr. Vs. Anasuyabai and ors. and P.K. Reddy and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-09-1984
Reported in: 1(1985)ACC273
Dharmadhikari, J.1. As in both these appeals common questions of law and fact were involved, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. It is an admitted position that an accident took place on 6th of June 1969 by about 8 45 p.m. In the said accident Patri Venkata Ramanayya lost his life and the driver of the car Shri P.K. Reddy also received injuries. The dependants of late Ramanayya filed a claim before the Motor Accidents Claims tribunal for Greater Bombay claiming an amount of Rs. 4 lacs as compensation. Shri Reddy the driver of the car also claimed compensation for the injuries received by him. After appreciating all the evidence on record the learned Member of the Tribunal granted an amount of Rs. 1,53.000/- as compensation to the dependants of late Ramanayya and a sum of Rs. 3,200/- to Shri P.K. Reddy together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the application till realisation. It is these awards which are chal...
Purificacao Fernandes and anr. Vs. Hugo Vicente De Perpetuo Socorro An ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-08-1984
Reported in: 1985MhLJ224
1. This set of civil appeals by the original defendant in the suit was initially admitted on the following substantial question of law : Whether a lease created for commercial purposes under the provisions of the Decree Mo. 43,525 dated 7th March, 1961 continues to be heritable under the provisions of the Goa, Daman, and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968. However, at the hearing of the appeal, another question was also allowed in respect as to whether the mesne profits can be fixed in excess of the rent which would be payable for the rented premises under the provisions of the Rent Control Act.2. The respondents had filed a suit for eviction against the appellants on the grounds that they are the owners of a house situated at Panaji and that, by an Agreement dated 10th July, 1946, their predecessors in title had given the said house on lease to one Domingos Pedro Xavier Fernandes, late husband of appellant 1 and father of appellant 2. The rented premises consis...
Sushilkumar R. Ruia Vs. Second Wealth-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-07-1984
Reported in: (1985)12ITD245(Mum.)
1. These two appeals by the assessee relate to the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78, for which the relevant valuation dates are 31-12-1975 and 31-12-1976, respectively. By order dated 6-4-1974, the Director, Enforcement Directorate, New Delhi, imposed penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs on the assessee under Section 23(1)(a) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947, for contravention of the provisions of Section 4(1) and Section 5(1)(a) of the said Act. It was mentioned in the said order that the penalty imposed should be deposited by the assessee at the Bombay Office of the Directorate within 45 days of the date of issue of the said order. The Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board, by order dated 17-1-1980, confirmed the said order of penalty and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The assessee filed further appeal under Section 23 EE of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act to the High Court. The High Court stayed the recovery of the amount on the condition of furnishing of securit...
Bennet Coleman and Co. Ltd. Vs. V.P. Damle, Third Income-tax Officer, ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-07-1984
Reported in: (1985)87BOMLR132; (1985)47CTR(Bom)342; [1986]157ITR812(Bom); [1985]21TAXMAN131(Bom)
Bharucha, J.1. The Income-tax Officer, T.D.S. Circle, served upon the petitioners orders dated July 23, 1979, under section 202(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for each of the assessment years 1971-72 to 1978-79. The orders stated that the petitioners had deducted tax under section 192(1) of the said Act from the salary paid to their employees for the periods stated therein but had failed to deposit the same with the Reserve Bank within the period prescribed under rule 30(1)(b) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. The petitioners had, therefore, become assessees in default in terms of section 201(1A) and had become liable to pay simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the amount of such tax for the period of the defaults.2. The petitioners preferred revision petitions against these orders to the Commissioner of Income-tax under section 264 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In his common order dated February 24, 1981. the Commissioner noted that it was conceded that there had been delays ...
S.P. Divekar and A.P. Divekar (Legal Representatives of P.K. Divekar) ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-07-1984
Reported in: (1985)87BOMLR18; (1985)47CTR(Bom)166; [1986]157ITR629(Bom); [1985]20TAXMAN396(Bom)
Bharucha, J.1. This is a reference under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, made at the instance of the assessee. The questions at are posed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal read thus :' (1) Whether the Tribunal erred in law or exercised its discretion un-judiciallyin not deciding the applicant's first submission that the Income-tax Officer was not justified in taking action under section 34(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and in remanding the case without giving a decision on that submission ? (2) Whether the Tribunal erred in law or acted without any evidence and contrary to the materials on record in treating the sum of Rs. 3,00,000 (Rupees three lakhs) as the concealed income of the applicant ?'2. We have, in our judgment dated September 19, 1983, reframed the first question to read thus :' (1) Whether the Income-tax Officer was justified in initiating reassessment proceedings under section 34(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ?'3. The reference relate...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »