Mumbai Court August 1985 Judgments
Vivek Ishwar Hebbar Vs. Dean, Goa Medical College, Panaji, Goa and ors ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-16-1985
Reported in: 1986MhLJ132
Couto, J.1. The petitioner, a candidate for admission to the M.B.B.S. course of the Goa Medical College for the session 1985-86, seeks in this petition a writ of mandamus or in the nature of mandamus commanding the first three respondents to forthwith admit him to the said course and further a declaration that the conditions that the candidate should have passed the XIIth standard (HSSCE/equivalent) form schools/colleges in the Union Territory of Goa, Daman and Dir, and that the exemption form passing the XIIth standard or its equivalent from such school/college is available only to the children of the officers of the Central Government posted under the Government of Goa, Daman and Diu, if the transfer of the concerned officer takes place during the mid-academic year when the children were studying in schools/colleges outside the Union Territory of Goa, Daman and Diu, are arbitrary and unconstitutional.2. The relevant facts may be stated. The petitioner is the son of a Central Governme...
Tag this Judgment!Kalpita Enclave Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. and ors. Vs. Kiran B ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-16-1985
Reported in: 1987(1)BomCR355; (1986)88BOMLR100; 1986MhLJ110
R.A. Jahagirdar, J.1. The two appeals and the petition raise an important question of law relating to the jurisdiction of the authority constituted under section 7(2) of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of the Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to for brevity's sake as the 'Ownership Flats Act'). Though the question which arises in all these three matters is common, for the sake of convenience I proceed to narrate the facts involved in Appeal No. 450 of 1985 from order. I will refer to the arguments advanced in support of that appeal by Mr. J.I. Mehta appearing for the appellants and also refer to the arguments urged on behalf of the appellants in the other appeal and on behalf of the petitioner in the Civil Revision Application. All the arguments on behalf of the persons who are challenging the view taken by the City Civil Court at Bombay are being dealt with and disposed of without some times specifically referring...
Tag this Judgment!Suhas Yeshwant Sawant Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Police and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-16-1985
Reported in: 1986(2)BomCR303
C.S. Dharmadhikari, J.1. Now in this writ petition the order passed in Appeal by the State Government dated 17th April, 1985 is challenged. It is not necessary to make a detailed reference to the various averments made in the petition, since by this order the de novo enquiry is ordered by the State Government after setting aside the order of dismissal passed in the departmental enquiry. The Appellate Authority held that the earlier enquiry was vitiated because the principles of natural justice were not followed and the petitioner was not given and was refused assistance by the friend of his choice. In terms it is held by the appellate authority that on that count the whole enquiry is vitiated. However, thereafter the de novo enquiry is order and if he is taken on duty by this order, then it is also directed that the decision regarding the period from the date of dismissal till he join his duty, will be taken in due course as per the rules. It is this order which is challenged in this w...
Tag this Judgment!Arun H. Bakle Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-14-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Bom230
K. Madhava Reddy, C.J.1. Dr. Arun Bakle, M. D. Cardiologist from Patrice Lumumba Peoples' Friendship University, U.S.S.R., having undergone one year's practical training (interneship) during 1979-80 as required by the rules and regulations in force in U.S.S.R. sought enrollment under S. 15(1), Medical Council Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), on the Maharashtra State Medical Register. It is his case that he has practiced medicine as a physician and was a permanent adviser at surgical departments in the Moscow Clinical Hospital No. 64 during the year 1982-83. He also did some research work in September 1983. He was, however, required to leave the work abruptly due to sudden demise of his father at Sholapur in Maharashtra State, he applied to the Secretary, Medical Council of India, New Delhi, respondent 2 herein, for registration By a letter D/- 7-11-1983. respondent 2 informed him (Exh. 'B') that 'Indian Nationals holding recognised foreign medical qualifications included in ...
Tag this Judgment!Bata India Ltd. Vs. Additional District Magistrate, Nagpur and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-14-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Bom259; 1986(1)BomCR590; 1986MhLJ66
Deshpande, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court refusing to interfere with the monthly rent of Rs. 2000/- fixed by the Rent Control authorities, on the ground that the question involved was purely one of fact.*Against judgment of Mr. Joshi, J. in Writ Petn. No. 1774 of 1983, D/-9-8-1983 (Bom).2. Respondents Nos. 2 to 4 are the owners of the building known as 'Amar Chambers',situate at Central Avenue Road, Nagpur. They filed an application on Mar. 27, 1975, for fixation of fair rent, under Ss. 4, 5 and 7(2) of the C.P. and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 ('the Rent Control Order', for short), on the ground that the prevailing rates of rent had increased enormously and there was an enormous rise also in the cost of building and materials since the year 1964. The appellant, on the other hand, contended that the fair rent was Rs. 300/- per month. After considering the evidence, the Rent Controller fixed the ren...
Tag this Judgment!Kumar Mohamed Rafique (Since Deceased) by His Heirs Vs. Municipal Corp ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-14-1985
Reported in: 2(1986)ACC42
P.B. Sawant, J.1. The victim of the accident in the present case was a boy of 11 years, the accident having taken place at about 7.30 p.m. on 8-9-1972 on R.A. Kidwai Marg, Bombay, in a locality which is popularly known as Wadala. The victim Mohamed Rafiq Haji Umar (hereinafter referred to as 'Mohamed') along with his cousin, witness Anis had boarded a passenger bus belonging to the B.E.S.T. at Kidwai Nagar bus-stop. The bus was crowded, hence both the boys had to contend themselves with standing accommodation. Anis who was aged 13 years had got into the bus before Mohamed and was therefore standing ahead of Mohamed. Mohamed was behind him and was standing in the passage at the tail-end which was near the doorway. Behind him was a seat on which the passengers were sitting. After the bus left Kidwai Nagar bus-stop, it did not stop at the next bus-stop which was the T.B. Hospital stop and headed towards Sewri Railway Station bus stop. It appears that while it was on its way to the railway...
Tag this Judgment!Damodar Keru Naiknaware Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-13-1985
Reported in: (1985)(5)LC1755Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The prayer in this application is for condonation of delay in filing the appeal CD (Bom.) 315 of 1985. It is averred in the application that the order in original against which the applicant preferred the appeal is dated 18-1-1984 but he had received the copy of the order only on 22-2-1985 and that within a period of three months from that date he had filed the appeal, viz. on 21-5-85. It was further stated in the application that the applicant was not directed to take delivery of the order-in-original any time earlier to 22-2-85 nor was he supplied with the copy of the said order earlier to that date. The applicant had contended that it was on his request made on 31-12-84, a copy was given to him on 22-2-1985.2. During the hearing of this application, Shri Shah, the applicant's learned Advocate referred to the above averments and also referred to the provisions of Section 131-A of the Customs Act, 1962.3. Shri Pattekar for the respondent Collector submitted that inspite of his bes...
Tag this Judgment!Ashish and Co. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-1985
Reported in: (1986)(8)LC279Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The Revision Application filed before the Govt. of India against the Order-in-Appeal No. S/49-62/80L dated 19-9-1980 passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs, Bombay statutorily stood transferred to the Tribunal for being heard as an appeal.2. The undisputed facts were that the appellants M/s. Ashish & Co. were the manufacturers of Plastic moulded/fabricated articles metallised or plain. Their manufacturing activity includes manufacturing presentation articles and novelties.3. During the Policy period 1979 A.M. the appellants imported 10 cartons plastic decorative pictures and claimed clearance against their Import licence bearing No. 2815183-dated 13-6-1978. The Customs objected to the clearance on the ground that the imported goods being three dimensional plastic decorative pictures which are used as such as consumer goods, the same are banned under Appendix 3 Item 750. After issue of show cause and after personal hearing, the Asstt. Collector of Customs ordered confiscat...
Tag this Judgment!Narayan Son of Bapurao Deshmukh Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-1985
Reported in: 1987(1)BomCR73
H.W. Dhabe, J.1. This is a writ petition arising out of the proceedings under the Maharashtra Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974 (for short, the Act).2. The petitioner is a Non-Tribal who had purchased the field survey number 77/2, admeasuring 6 acres of village Chincholi, Tahsil Darwha, District Yeotmal by registered sale-deed dated 15-5-1957 from the respondent No. 1-Tribal. The said transfer made to him by the respondent No. 2 tribal was thus within the mischief of section 2(1)(i) of the Act. Sou motu proceedings were initiated against him by the Additional Tahsildar for transfer of the suit field to the respondent No. 2 tribal under section 3 of the Act. Accordingly after making necessary enquiries the learned Additional Tahsildar directed by his order dated 30-12-1978 that the suit field should be restored to the respondent No. 2-tribal. It appears that the petitioner had initially filed a writ petition in this Court challenging the validity of the Act, which was w...
Tag this Judgment!State of Maharashtra Vs. Kaluram Janardhan Barne
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-1985
Reported in: 1986(2)BomCR49
N. Khatri, J.1. The D.B. Marg Police presented a charge sheet before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 40th Court, Girgaum, Bombay, against the present respondents under section 304, Part II r.w. 109 of the I.P.C. on the allegation that on 27th March, 1982, the respondent No. 1 caused the death of one Haribhau Sukale by giving him a hard push as a result of which the deceased who was drunk, lost balance and fell down on the kerb of the footpath. The respondents No. 1 is also alleged to have assaulted the deceased with kicks. The allegations against respondents No. 2 and 3 are that they abetted the respondent No. 1 by hurling abuses at the deceased. The learned Magistrate summoned the Medical Officer who had carried out the autopsy as a witness and in the light of the police papers and the evidence of this witness, came to the conclusion that an offence punishable under section 325, I.P.C. only was prima facie made out that too against respondent No. 1 alone. As rega...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »