Mumbai Court September 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.
Shankarlal Satyanarayan Oil Mills and Etc. Vs. State of Maharashtra an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Bom169; 1985MhLJ259
Ginwala, J.1. Since common questions of fact and law are involved in these petitions, they can conveniently be disposed of be a common judgment.2. The petitioners in all these petitions are either traders dealing in cotton seed or manufacturers who produce oil out of cotton seed. The respondents are the State of Maharashtra, the Maharashtra State Co-operative Marketing Federation Ltd. (Marketing Federation for short) and various Agricultural Produce Market Committees constituted under the provisions of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963 ('the Act' for short). The Marketing Federation has been appointed by the State Government as its agent in exercise of its power under the Maharashtra Raw Cotton (Procurement, Processing and Marketing) Act, 1971 (Raw Cotton Act for short) for carrying on trade of purchasing or processing of raw cotton and selling ginned cotton and cottonseed on its behalf. The petitioners purchase their requirement of cotton seed from ...
Bharat Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Gre ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Bom242; 1985(1)BomCR310; (1983)86BOMLR504; 1984MhLJ865
Lentin, J.1. Are the appellants' 3 underground petrol tanks 'building', so as to attract the provisions of section 299 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act. Such is the essential controversy before us.2. The appellants are the owners of a petrol station at Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli. It is serviced by 3 underground mild steel petrol tanks. The capacity of each tank is 2,000 gallons. They are embedded in the ground. They are at some distance from the petrol station. Petrol is stored in these tanks and serviced to the petrol station for being put into the customers' vehicles. Originally the petrol station was away from the regular line of the street. On 17th October 1977 the Municipal Corporation drew a new regular line of the street. It was entitled to do so under the Act and there after compulsorily take away certain lands falling within the new regular line. On the 17th April 1980 the Corporation issued a notice to the appellants under section 299 that possession of the land woul...
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Niranjan Shridhar Gad ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1984
Reported in: 1985(1)BomCR94; (1984)86BOMLR497; [1985(50)FLR1]; 1984MhLJ983
R.A. Jahagirdar, J.1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order passed by the Presiding Officer in the Labour Court at Nasik on 30th September 1981 in Complaint (ULP) No. 240 of 1976. The said complaint had been filed by the first respondent in this petition, hereinafter referred to as ''the respondent'', under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, hereinafter referred to as ''Act I of 1972''. It was the case of the respondent that the petitioner, which is the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, had terminated his services which was an unfair labour practice within the meaning of Clauses (b), (d), (f) and (g) of Item 1 of Schedule IV of the Act 1 of 1972. The Labour Court held, answering an issue which it raised, that the enquiry which was held against the respondent was not fair, proper and legal.2. In order to understand the nature of the controversy between the partie...
Tukaram Kisan Nanaware Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1984
Reported in: 1985(2)BomCR264; (1984)86BOMLR502; 1984MhLJ924
S.C. Pratap, J.1. This petition arises out of proceedings under section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act.2. The petitioner is employed in the establishment of the Mula Canal Division of respondent No. 1 State Government. He was recruited as a mukadam on or about 21st February, 1964. However, though he was recruited as mukadam, the actual work that he carried out since inception of his recruitment as mukadam was as follows :---He used to record the attendance of the workers in the Muster-Roll. He would then send the daily report of the work done by the mazdoors to his superiors. He maintained the density register and registers of Nominal Moisture Content and Optimum Moisture Contents. At the end of each month he had to prepare the pay register. It was his function to receive leave application of the workers and submit them to the superiors for sanction. He maintained the Weight Register and records of permeability test from time to time. He also maintained the register under the E...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Gopichand Uttamchand Keswani
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-13-1984
Reported in: 1985(1)BomCR559
Qazi, J.1. The Additional Session Judge, Thane has convicted accused Gopichand Uttamchand Keswani for having committed murder of his wife Nirmala between the night of July 3 and July 4, 1983 in Barrack No. 862, Section 19, Camp No. 3, Ulhasnagar, and sentenced him to death, subject to confirmation of the same by this Court. Hence, Confirmation Case No. 1 of 1984 has been registrated. The accused has also filed an appeal challenging his conviction and sentence and the same is registered as Criminal Appeal No. 307 of 1984. This judgment will dispose of the appeal as well as the Confirmation Case. The facts which gave rise to the Confirmation Case and the appeal may, in brief, be stated as follows :2. The accused resided along with his wife the deceased Nirmala in Barrack No. 862, Section No. 19, Camp No. 3, Ulhasnager. They were married about 7 or 8 years prior to the date of the incident, i.e. July 4, 1983. One daughter by name Geeta was born to the deceased Nirmala out of the said wedl...
Sadiq Ali and anr. Vs. Manu Narrang
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-13-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Bom274; 1985(1)BomCR164; (1984)86BOMLR491; 1984MhLJ1075
1. The Petitioners are obstructing the execution of a decree obtained by the respondent as long ago as in March 1973 against the one Balsara who was the original defendant in the suit. That suit was suit No. 3032 of 1962 and had been filed by the predecessor-in-title of the respondent against the said Balsara for possession of certain property. A Chamber Summons for the removal of the obstruction of the petitioner has been taken out in the year 1981 and that is Chamber Summons No. 74 of 1981. Apart from the merits of the obstruction, the petitioner told the Court below, namely, the City Civil Court, that the proceedings in obstruction are to be conducted in accordance with R. 98 of O. 21 of the Civil P.C. as substituted by the Bombay High Court by its Notification dt. 30th Sept. 1966 and not in accordance with the procedure as amended by the Central Parliament by the Amending Act 104 of 1976. The Court below was invited to frame an issue as per this contention and it has been so done b...
Eknath Vishnoo Hinge and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-11-1984
Reported in: 1985(1)BomCR598; 1985MhLJ727
C.S. Dharmadhikari, J.1. Respondent No. 18 the Pune Zilla Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh Ltd., is a specified society within the meaning of section 73-G of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Board of Directors of said society was duty elected in accordance with the provisions of section 73-G read with Chapter XI-A of the Act in the year 1981 and as such the said Directors were entitled to remain in office for a duration of five years under sub-section (2) of section 73-G of the Act, and thereafter till the new Board of Directors is Elected. The said term of five years will expire in the year 1986. The petitioners are the elected members on the Board of Directors of the said society and, therefore, were entitled to remain in office as Directors till 1986 so also till the new Board of Directors is elected. This position is not is dispute. However, by an order dated 28th of February, 1984 the State Government appointed a new Board of Director...
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. S.P. Khetan
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-1984
Reported in: (1985)11ITD274(Mum.)
1. This appeal by the department arises out of the proceeding for the assessment of estate duty and the only point involved is regarding the extent of relief admissible under Section 31 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 ('the Act').2. Rameshwar Khetan, the deceased, was formerly a partner in the firm of Balchand Rameshwardas. The other partner was his father Balchand, Balchand died on 10-4-1970. On the said death, the deceased, Rameshwar inherited the interest of Balchand in the partnership firm. He then became the sole proprietor of the said business. The deceased also inherited self-occupied flat as well as motor car and jewellery. The above properties passed on the death of Balchand and were inherited by the deceased Rameshwar on 10-4-1970. Within nearly nine months of his inheriting this property, the deceased, Rameshwar, died on 18-1-1971.Hence, the said property, which had passed on the first death, passed again on the second death which took place within about nine months.Consequent...
Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay City-i Vs. Murphy India Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-1984
Reported in: (1985)45CTR(Bom)167; [1985]156ITR451(Bom)
Desai, J.1. In this reference, the question referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is as under :'Whether shares held by a company in which the public are substantially interested within the meaning of section 2(18) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are shares held by the public within the meaning of section 2(18)(b) ?'2. Thus, in the orders of the Income-tax Officer, Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal from which this reference ultimately came to the High Court, the question being canvassed was whether the assessee company can be regarded as a company in which the public are substantially interested The question involves the proper construction and application of the provisions contained in section 2(18) as the statutory provisions stood for the assessment years 1970-71 and 1972-73.3. If we peruse the order of the Income-tax Officer, it is found that the Income-tax Officer came to the conclusion that the assessee company could not be treated as a company in which ...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i Vs. Vyjayanthimala Bali
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-1984
Reported in: (1985)45CTR(Bom)191; [1985]155ITR662(Bom); [1985]20TAXMAN147(Bom)
Desai, J.1. This reference had reached earlier before us on September 3, 1984. On that day, we suggested to the learned counsel for the Commissioner that additional material was required to be tendered, and in pursuance of our suggestion, a compilation has been tendered to us which has been taken on record by consent.2. In this reference as many as six questions stand referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, namely :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner regarding the proper construction of section 280U of the Income-tax,Act, 1961,was 'information' within the meaning of the term as used in section 147(b) of the said Act ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in circumstances of the case,the Income-tax Officer validity initiated and completed reassessment under section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? (3) Whether law prescribes any period of limitation for making additional deposit under section 280U...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »