Mumbai Court July 1985 Judgments
Arun Kautik Pawar Vs. Sau Laxmi Arun Pawar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-24-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)BomCR619; (1985)87BOMLR670; 1985MhLJ743
P.B. Samant, J.1. These two matters arise under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and raise three questions of law, two of which are common to both. Hence they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. To appreciate the questions of law, it is necessary to state the relevant facts in each case. In First Appeal No. 449 of 1981, the husband who is the appellant here, had filed a petition for dissolution of marriage against the respondent wife on the ground of desertion and adultery. The marriage was celebrated on May 25, 1972 and the petition was presented on 8th/10th June, 1977. The petition was posted for hearing on March, 21, 1979 when the respondent-wife was absent. The Advocate who appeared for her passed purshis stating that he had no instructions from her. The petition was thereafter adjourned to March 23, 1979 for hearing and on that day, an ex parte decree was passed dissolving the marriage. On learning of the decree,...
Tag this Judgment!Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-24-1985
Reported in: 1990(28)LC83(Bombay)
S.C. Pratap, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeks to challenge order dated 17th January 1981 of the Export Commissioner dismissing the petitioners' appeal against order dated 15th February 1980 passed by the Committee of Administration of the Cotton Textiles Export Promotion Council--respondent No. 3 herein.2. Relevant facts and circumstances are as follows: The first petitioners are a public limited company with the second petitioner a shareholder and director thereof. The second respondent--the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports - is the licensing authority appointed under the Imports (Control) Order 1955 issued in exercise of powers under Sections 3 and 4A of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947. The third respondents are the registered authority specified under the Import Trade Control Hand Book of Rules and Procedure published by the first respondent--Union of India--and are specified as the registering authority for cotton textiles. As such r...
Tag this Judgment!Education Foundation of India Vs. Fourth Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-1985
Reported in: (1985)14ITD466(Mum.)
1. These four appeals relating to the assessment years 1975-76 to 1978-79, filed by the assessee against the consolidated order of the AAC, deal with the same issue and are, therefore, for the sake of convenience, disposed of by a common order.2. The assessee is a trust settled by Dr. Jagdish Parikh by deed of trust dated 8-8-1974. The objects of the trust were as follows : I. To open, establish, maintain, acquire, support aid or grant monetary assistance to universities, schools, colleges, polytechnic institutions, research laboratories or other vidyapith or organisation or institution imparting education and training to students in such line and course as the trustees may, from time to time, determine. II. To establish and support professorship, fellowship, lecturership, prizes, awards, etc., at schools, colleges or other educational institutions or organisations on such terms and conditions as the trustees may deem fit or without any terms and conditions. III. To open, establish, m...
Tag this Judgment!Municipal Corporation Through Municipal Commissioner Vs. Shankar S/O H ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-1985
Reported in: 1986(2)BomCR38
Sharad Manohar, J.1. Quite an important question relating to the interpretation and functioning of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act 1966, (hereinafter referred to as 'The Town Planning Act'), arises for consideration in this appeal.2. Respondent No. 1 (who will be referred to hereinafter as the accused) is owner and occupant of a plot situate at Paharsinghpura, Aurangabad within the territorial limit of the Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad.On 15-12-1980, one of the officers of the Aurangabad Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') noticed some construction being carried on by the accused upon the said plot of land unauthorisedly. He informed this fact to the Chief Officer and the Chief Officer issued a notice dated 15-12-1980 addressed to the accused calling upon him to stop the construction and to remove the unauthorised constructions within one day from the receipt of the notice. It is the contention of the prosecution that the notice dated...
Tag this Judgment!Uklya S/O Fakriya and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-1985
Reported in: 1986(2)BomCR431
Sharad Manohar, J.1. This is an appeal against the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Nanded, convicting the present appellants who were original accused Nos. 1 and 7 respectively of the offence under section 395 of the IPC and sentencing them to rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 months.2. The facts relating to the prosecution case have been fully set out in the judgment in appeal and since I am confirming the order of conviction passed by the learned Judge, I find it unnecessary to refer to all the facts stated by him elaborately. However, I will mention the salient facts :--It may be stated here itself that the factum about the offence of dacoity is not in dispute at least at this appeal stage. The only question to be decided is as to the identity of the offenders. There were in all 7 accused arrayed before the trial Court. The identification of 5 of them has ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Mangala G. Abhyankar Vs. First Assistant Controller of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1985
Reported in: (1986)15ITD252(Mum.)
1. Shri G.M. Abhyankar died on 19-2-1981. His widow Smt. Mangala G.Abhyankar is the accountable person and she has filed this appeal against order dated 21-3-1983, passed by the Controller (Appeals).2. The first ground relates to an amount of Rs. 52,500 being the amount of commission payable to the deceased on the date of his death. The assessee was managing director of Hico Products Ltd. He was entitled to commission from his employer under Clause 5(1)(6) of the agreement dated 31-7-1979. Clause 5(1)(c) and (b) read as follows : (1) In consideration of the performance of his duties, the company shall, during the continuance of this agreement pay to the managing director. (b) Commission at the rate of 1 per cent on the annual net profits of the company computed in the manner referred to in Section 198 of the Companies Act, 1956 subject to a maximum of Rs. 45,000. . .3. The commission payable to the deceased on the date of death was as follows :31-12-1980) 45,000Commission for the peri...
Tag this Judgment!S.C. Roy and Others Vs. Kantilal Nanchand and Co. and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1985
Reported in: 1989(41)ELT191(Bom)
Smt. Sujata V. Manohar, J.1. The Appellants are the original respondents (hereinafter referred to as the respondents). The original petitioners 1 and 3 are the respondents herein. (They will be referred to hereinafter as the petitioners).2. The petitioners at all material times carried on business, inter alia, as Jewellers at Mumbadevi Road, Bombay-3. On 24th May 1969 petitioner No. 1 firm purchased silver articles weighing more than 700 kgs. in the normal course of their business. The transactions were entered in the 'Roj-Mel' as also in the purchase book. On the same day Petitioner No. 1 firm sold some of these silver articles to one Messrs Sun Shine Traders. The firm however, decided to send the remaining silver articles to one Manubhai Chhaganlal Dosalbhai at Ahmedabad. For this purpose the petitioners sent 24 boxes containing these silver articles to the firm of M/s. Kantilal Somabhai Angadia who were running a carrier service between Bombay and Ahmedabad. The total net weight of ...
Tag this Judgment!Vidarbha Nagarpalika Parishad and ors. Etc. Vs. State of Maharashtra a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Bom147; 1985(2)BomCR724; (1995)87BOMLR492; 1985MhLJ887
Madhava Reddy, C.J.1. This batch of writ petitions is referred to a larger Bench to reconsider the constitutional validity of S. 48A of the Maharashtra Municipalities Act (Act No. XL of 1965), 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), which was upheld by a Division Bench of this Court in Mohamed Maqbool v. State of Maharashtra : AIR1982Bom312 . Section 48A of the Act reads as follows:'48A. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 40 or any other provisions of this Act, where the term of office of five years of the councilors of any Council has expired and the State Government is of opinion that in the changed circumstances the continuance of such Councilors in office is not necessary or expedient, the State Government may, at any time, even during the period the terms stands extended under sub-sec. (1) or (3) of S. 40, by order published in the Official Gazettee, direct that (a) all councilors of the Council (including the President and the vice-president) shall, as from th...
Tag this Judgment!Sumeshchandra Kailashchandra and Co. and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1985
Reported in: 1986(1)BomCR103
R.A. Jahagirdar, J.1. This is an appeal from the decree passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nanded in Land Acquisition Reference No. 42 of 1971. The Appellant is a firm and had preferred a claim by an application made under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act of 1894, which was referred to the Civil Court by the Land Acquisition Officer. By the aforesaid decree, the Civil Court not only dismissed the claim of the appellant but also passed a decree against the appellant though the appellant was in the character of a plaintiff before it. The latter part of the decree is wholly wrong and will have to be set aside for reasons which we proceed to give in this judgment. But, we must now narrate the facts first. They are unusual facts.2. Land Survey No. 11 measuring 33 acres and 3 gunthas located at Jangamwadi, a village on the periphery of the Municipal town of Nanded, originally belonged to one Kadar Ali Kasam Ali. From what has been stated in the record of this case, it...
Tag this Judgment!P.R. Shendulekar Vs. Settlement Commissioner and Director of Land Reco ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1985
Reported in: (1985)87BOMLR683
R.A. Jahagirdar, J.1. The petitioner was holding at the relevant time the post of Senior Clerk in the office of the Chief Settlement Commissioner and the Director of Land Records whose headquarters are at Pune. He came to hold this post after prolonged litigation. He had to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution on more than one occasion. Ultimately, by an order dated March 6, 1981 he came to 'be appointed to the post of the Senior Clerk with effect from January 16, 1975. Even this appointment was not strictly in accordance with the directions given by this Court in earlier litigation and subsequently by an order dated May 24, 1982 the petitioner's deemed date of promotion in the post of Senior Clerk was fixed as on February 15, 1971. In the seniority list of the Senior Clerks, the petitioner was at Sr. No. 11, while respondents Nos. 3 and 4 were at Sr. Nos. 14 and 15 respectively.2. Respondent No. 1 is the Settlement Commissioner and the Director of Land Records, wh...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »