Mumbai Court April 1985 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.
Sarju International, Bombay Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-1985
Reported in: 1989(39)ELT542(Bom)
1. The petitioners are manufacturers and exporters of cotton ready made garments including T-Shirts, Children's clothing, Industrial Garments etc.3. On the basis of this export assistance scheme the petitioners entered into, inter alia, nine contracts all dated 21st August 1978 with foreign buyers for export of hosiery T-Shirts. These contracts were order Nos. 78248, 78249, 78345, 78241, 78239, 78173, 78233, 78240 and 78242. Pursuant to these contracts the goods were exported in the months of January and February 1979. Therefore the petitioners submitted to the second respondents their applications for cash assistance incentives under the said scheme in respect of the exports so effected. The petitioners however, have been denied the cash incentives prescribed under the scheme on the basis that under a Circular dated 6th January 1979, which is Exhibit 'N' to the petition the cash compensatory support on the cotton garments described therein has been discontinued with effect from 1st of...
Gajanan P. Achrekar Vs. the State Transport Authority of Goa and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-1985
Reported in: AIR1985Bom389; (1985)87BOMLR314; 1986MhLJ825
Masodkar, J.1. This is a petition against the order made by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Panaji, rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner under S. 64 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939, on the ground that the said appeal was time-barred in that it was filed beyond the period of 30 days prescribed by the law.2. The appeal itself was filed on 7th July, 1983, along with a certified copy of the order of the State Transport Authority. That order was applied for on 27th May, 1983, and it is apparent that the copy was received by the petitioner on 7th June, 1983. Within 30 days from there the appeal was preferred.3. The Tribunal has held that the appellant having come to know of the order before 27th May, 1983, the appeal filed on 7th July, 1983 was barred by time.4. The provisions of S. 57(7) of the Act require the Authority to give to the applicant in writing the reasons concerning the refusal of permit. These provisions are intended to enable the party to assail those reasons by...
Nilkanth Sitaram Patil Vs. the Dhule Taluka Doodh Utpadak Krishi Purak ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-1985
Reported in: (1994)IIILLJ23Bom
M.S. Jamdar, J.1. The petitioner, who died after filing this petition sought to challenge the order passed by the Member, Industrial Court, Bombay, rejecting his complaint under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act') that respondent No. 1 committed unfair labour practice within the meaning of item 3 of Schedule IV to the Act by unilaterally transferring his services to Shirpur Taluka Dudh Utpadak Krishi Purak Udyog Sahakari Sangh Ltd. (hereinafter called 'Shirpur Taluka Sangh).2. The petitioner was appointed as a clerk in the office of the first respondent, a cooperative society, registered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, and engaged in the business of milk collection from its member societies and supplying it to the Maharashtra Government. By a Resolution dated 10th June 1977, the name of Dhule Zilla Doodh Utpadak Krishi Purak Udyog Sahak...
S.S. Miranda Limited and anr. Vs. Union of Inida (Uoi), M.C. Thakur, A ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-1985
Reported in: 1992(41)LC373(Bombay)
Sawant, J.1. The present controversy arises out of the decisions under the Central Excise Act by the Supreme Court on the subject of the post manufacturing expenses in Union of India and Ors. v. Bombay Tyres International Private Limited reported in 1983 ELT 869 : 1983 ECR 653 : ECR C 659 SC and 1983 ELT 1896 : 1983 ECR 1627 SC : ECR C 663 SC and also in 1984 (17) ELT 329 : 1983 ECR 2233 (SC) : ECR C 693 SC and the order passed by this Court in the present petition on the 9lh December 1983. In order to appreciate the precise nature of the controversy, it is necessary to state the following few preliminary facts:1A. The Petitioners are a public limited company engaged in the business of manufacturing of engineering goods such as tool bits, rounds, turnings, hacksaw blades, etc. After this Court gave its decision on the question of post manufacturing expenses in the case of Bombay Tyres International Private Limited which was reported in 1979 ELT 625 : 1980 CC 37 (Bom), the Petitioners s...
In Re: Kohinoor Mills Co. Ltd. Ex Parte Jay Chemi Colour Industries an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-1985
Reported in: [1986]60CompCas55(Bom)
Parekh, J.1. The short point that needs to be decided of the disposal of this petition is whether in view of the fact that the management of Kohinoor Mills Co. Ltd. has been taken over under the Textile Undertakings (Taking Over of Management) Act, 1983 (No. 40 of 1983, this company petition seeking a winding-up of the said company and the appointment of an official liquidator is maintainable.2. The facts that lead up to this petition are that the Kohinoor Mills Co. Ltd. came to be indebted to the petitioners. The petitioners thereupon served the usual statutory notice calling upon the company to pay up its dues. The requisitions in the notice not being complied with, the petitioners filed this petition in July, 1983. On September 28, 1983, consent terms were arrived at. These consent terms provided that the company would pay to the petitioners the amount by instalments (as provided in the consent terms), and in the event of default of payment of the instalments (as provided therein), ...
Vinayak Ramchandra Sakhalkar and Etc. Etc. Vs. D. Ramchandran, Commiss ... Overruled
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)BomCR384; (1985)87BOMLR211; 1985MhLJ879
Dharmadhikari, J.1. As all these writ petitions involve common questions of law and facts, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. In these writ petitions the detenus were detained by the Commissioner of Police, Thane in exercise of powers conferred upon him by section 3(2) of the National Security Act, with a view to preventing them from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. Together with the orders of detention, grounds of detention and the copies of the documents referred to and relied upon were also supplied to the detenus. It is these orders of detention and the continued detention of the detenus which are challenged in these writ petitions.2. It is not necessary to make a detailed reference to the various averments made in the petitions or in the affidavits in reply, since the Counsel for the Petitioners has mainly argued before us only the questions of law which are common to all these writ petitions.3. Shri Kotw...
Bansilal Jesasingh Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-1985
Reported in: 1988LC396(Bombay); 1988(36)ELT52(Bom)
1. The petitioner carries on business in the firm name and style of 'Bansi Automobiles'.2. The Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports had issued in favour of one M/s. General Spares Industries Private Ltd. an import licence bearing No. 2709065 dated 19th August 1974 for import, inter alia, of Fuel Injection Equipment as component of Internal Combustion Engine. This licence was issued to M/s. General Spares Industries Pvt. Ltd. as actual users under the Import Policy for registered exporters.3. M/s. General Spares Industries Pvt. Ltd. applied to the Deputy Collector of Customs for issuing in favour of the petitioner a Letter of Authority for importing the said goods under the said Import Licence. Accordingly a Letter of Authority dated 2nd November 1974 was issued in favour of the petitioners who were accordingly authorised to act as agents of M/s. General Spares Industries Pvt. Ltd. to import the said goods and to open letter of credit and make remittances in Foreign Exchange ag...
Pushpaben Narayan Rathod Vs. Uttamchand Bhurmal Nahar Etc.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Bom82; 1985(2)BomCR650; (1985)87BOMLR431; 1985MhLJ757
ORDER1. A short but interesting question is raised by a somewhat novel argument advanced by Shri V.P. Tipnis, the learned Advocate for the Petitioner, whose appeal against the decree for eviction on the ground of default in payment of rent for a period of more than six months, has proved unsuccessful. Admittedly the petitioner tenant was in arrears of rent for the period from 1st January 1976 to 30th September 1976 and the arrears amounted to Rs. 245.70 p. The landlord since deceased addressed a notice dated 5th October 1976 to the Petitioner calling upon her to pay all arrears of rent then due and terminated her tenancy at the end of November 1976. The notice was served on the petitioner on 7th October 1976. The petitioner paid all arrears of rent up to the end of October 1976 on 11th November 1976 vide the receipt of even date. The landord filed suit on 1st December 1976 for decree of eviction against the petitioner under S. 12(3)(a) of the Bombay Rent Act on the ground that the peti...
Bharat Barrel and Drum Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Grea ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-1985
Reported in: AIR1985Bom415; ILR1985Bom2144; 1985MhLJ535
Madhava Reddy, C.J.1. The short question that falls for consideration in this appeal directed against the judgment in Miscellaneous Petition No.1148 of 1973 is, whether under the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on detection of a defect in the meter installed by the licensee, a revised demand for charges of electric consumption for a period of more than six months could be made and whether the supply of electricity could be disconnected for non-payment of such charges. The few facts necessary to decide this question are not in dispute and must be noticed.2. The original petitioner, a private limited company duly registered under the Companies Act with its registered office at Bombay is the appellant. It owns and runs a dyeing and bleaching Mill called 'Jalan Dyeing and Bleaching Mills'. On 28th Nov.1964 it entered into an agreement with the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay, respondent I herein (hereinafter referred to as 'the licensee'), which ...
Babubhai Nylchand Mehta Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-1985
Reported in: 1986(1)BomCR274; 1988LC54(Bombay); 1986MhLJ367
Sujata V. Manohar, J.1. The petitioner, inter alia, carries on business of making of waterproof kraft paper under the name and style of 'Neptune Waterproof Manufacturing Company'. This concern is the sole proprietary concern of the petitioner. The petitioner purchased kraft paper and other requisite ingredients from the open market and manufactures certain types of kraft paper by the process of bonding, lining, impregnating and sandwiching certain other ingredients with kraft paper. The items under dispute are: (1) Bituminised water proof packing paper, (2) Polythenelined kraft packing paper, (3) Waxed kraft packing paper, (4) Jute-Lined bituminised waterproof packing paper, (5) Waxed kraft packing paper and (6) Hessian lined kraft paper. The only difference between Items 3 and 5 is that item 3 refers to waxed kraft packing paper of 40 gms., 50 gms. and 60 gms., while Item 5 refers to waxed kraft packing paper above 65 gms.2. The respondent have levied excise duty under the Central Exc...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »