Mumbai Court March 1986 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.
international Electronics Mfg. Co. and Others Vs. Union of India and O ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-18-1986
Reported in: 1986(8)ECC166; 1986(25)ELT630(Bom)
1. The petitioners imported synthetic waste between November, 1983 and January, 1984. The waste was assessed by the customs authorities under item 18IV of the Central Excise Tariff and an amount of Rs. 21,39.122 was collected from the petitioners as and by way of additional duty.2. On 4th October, 1984, 7th October, 1984 and 12th October, 1984, the petitioners' advocate made claims for refund of the additional duty paid on the basis of a judgment and order of the Collector of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi, by which it was held that synthetic waste did not fall within the purview of item 18IV. The claims were rejected on 3rd December, 1984 on the ground that they were not received within 6 months from the date of payment of duty. The appeals filed against this order were dismissed upon the same ground.3. This petition seeks the quashing of the orders dated 30th October, 1984 and 3rd December, 1984 and the orders in appeal.4. By his judgment in O.O.C.J. Writ Petition No. 1802 of 1983 M/s....
Mumbai Mazdoor Sabha and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-18-1986
Reported in: (1993)IIILLJ421Bom
Bharucha, J. 1. This petition impugns an order dated 3rd Nov. 1984 passed by the 1st respondent under Section 12(5) read with Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, declining to refer for adjudication a dispute raised by the 1st petitioner by its letter dated 1st December 1982 and praying for a writ directing such reference.2. The 1st petitioner is a registered trade union. The workmen of the 2nd respondent (Reliance Textile Industries Ltd.) joined the 1st petitioner-union in September 1982.3. On 17th Nov. 1982 some of these workmen were transferred from the 2nd respondent's premises at Andheri, Bombay, to its premises at Dhobi Talao, Bombay. On 25th Nov. 1982, 120 of these transferred workmen were informed by telegrams and letters that they had been retrenched from the 2nd respondent's service. The notice wages, retrenchment compensation and other dues were sent by Money Order. On 27th Nov. 1982, 173-more of the transferred workmen were retrenched by telegrams and letters...
Udhav Rao Saheb Magar Vs. Laxmibai W/O Udhav Magar and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-18-1986
Reported in: 1986(2)BomCR609
M.S. Ratnaparkhi, J.1. The petitioner who was a judgment-debtor before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Latur, in Misc. Criminal Application No. 42 of 1983 (filed under section 128 of the Criminal Procedure Code) seeks to revise the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Latur, dismissing the objection raised by the petitioner to the execution filed by present respondent No. 1.2. The facts giving rise to this litigation may be briefly stated as follows:-The present petitioner and respondent No. 1 are the husband and wife and the wedlock still subsists. It is also an undisputed position that the wife obtained an order of maintenance against her husband in Misc. Criminal Application No. 21 of 1976. The husband was directed to pay the maintenance of Rs. 45/- per month to his wife. It appears that the maintenance was not regularly paid and hence, the wife put in an application for execution contemplated under section 128 of the Criminal Procedure Code. This application...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Ramjan Adbul Masalman
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-18-1986
Reported in: 1986(3)BomCR54
A.D. Tated, J.1. The State preferred this appeal against the order of acquittal passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thane in Summary Case No. 6103 of 1984 acquitting the respondent Ramjam Abdul Musalman of the offence under section 124 of the Bombay Police Act.2. The Police Head Constable Bhimrao Mahadu Mahajan along with other constable was on patrolling duty on Sion-Panvel way on 21-8-1984 at about 1.30 P.M. At that time they noticed the accused (respondent) carrying 17 Iron pipes of 1/2 inch diameter and of length 10 feet of each on a handcart. On a street by the side of Sion-Panvel Road near Vashi when interrogated the accused did not give satisfactory explanation in respect of his possession of those iron pipes. Therefore, the complainant Head Constable suspected them to be stolen property fraudulently obtained and in the presence of two panchas seized the property after drawing a panchanama.' They took the accused and the property at the Police Station, Turbhe. The H...
Umapati Vasudev Vyas Vs. University of Bombay and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-17-1986
Reported in: 1986(2)BomCR347
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. The petitioner was admitted to the Pre-Ayurvedic I course in the Smt. Kamladevi Mittal Punarvasu Ayurvedic College, Bombay, in July 1980 and he passed the relevant examination in May 1981. In May 1982 he appeared for the Pre-Ayurvedic II examination conducted by the University of Bombay (the 1st respondent). Its results were declared on 31st July, 1982. The petitioner was declared to have passed in all subjects but one, namely, Ayurveda it has Parichaya.2. On 17th August, 1981 the petitioner applied to the University for revaluation of his marks in the subject in which he had failed.3. In August 1982, it is the petitioners case, he applied to the College, of which the 2nd respondent is the Principal, to be allowed to study for the First Year Bachelor of Ayurved in Medicine and Surgery (Main) course subject to the result of the revaluation. The Principal granted permission to him to do so. The petitioner attended, it is his case, the relevant classes and practicals.4...
Krishna K. Puthran and ors. Vs. Shrikrishna B. Jadhav and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-17-1986
Reported in: 1986(2)BomCR705
A.D. Tated, J.1. This revision application is directed against the order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, in Sessions Case No. 491 of 1979 decided on 5th October, 1981 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the respondents-accused Nos. 1 to 4 of offences punishable under sections 307,324 and 323 read with section 34 I.P.C.2. The prosecution case may be summarised as follows. The petitioner No. 1 Krishna K. Puthran with his wife Chandravati (petitioner No. 2), their three sons, namely, Janardan, aged 26 years, Narayan aged 22 years and Chandrashekhar (petitioner No. 3) aged 18 years, and two daughters, namely, Premlata aged 20 years and Rupa, occupied Room No. 7. in Municipal Chawl No. 10/D, Barve Nagar, Ghatkopar (west), Bombay, for the last more than ten years. About a month before the date of the incident the respondents-accused Nos. 1,3 and 4 who are brothers, accused No. 3. Vasant being the eldest occupied the adjoining ...
L.M.S. Tool Room Vs. First Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-14-1986
Reported in: (1986)16ITD643(Mum.)
1. These two appeals by the assessee for the assessment years 1979-80 and 1980-81 are directed against the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals), confirming the orders of the ITO refusing to grant registration to the assessee-firm L.M.S. Tool Room, Bombay. The assessee-firm was formed by a deed of partnership dated 4-10-1978. The firm consisted of three partners. Two of these partners are private limited companies and the third partner (who is mentioned as a party of the first part in the deed of partnership) is described in the opening portion of the said partnership deed as follows : Shri Narendra L. Shah (acting as partner) for and on behalf of Indian Textile Accessories Co., the existing partnership concern registered under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932.Shri Niranjan B. Shah and Shri Surendra L. Shah are the persons who have signed the partnership deed for and on behalf of these two companies, respectively. Clause 7 which deals with profit and loss sharing ratio is as follows : ...
Garware Plastics and Polyster Ltd. and Another Vs. Union of India and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-14-1986
Reported in: 1986(2)BomCR721; 1986(24)ELT449(Bom)
Vaz, J.1. 'We do not have a developed system of Administrative law', said Lord Reid in Ridge v. Baldwin, (1964) A.C. 40, years ago, but qualified it by saying wistfully : 'perhaps because until fairly recently we did not need it'. That was in 1964, but the Petitioner before us who has been asked to shell out a tidy sum of 86 lacs by way of excise duties probably does not share the optimism of Lord Reid.2. Garware Plastics & Polyester Limited, of New Industrial Area, Chikalthana, Aurangabad (Petitioner) are engaged in the manufacture of polyester films upto and including a thickness of 0.25 mm. and use polyester chips as the basic material which has to be imported. Section 3 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (No. 1 of 1944), ('the Excise Act'), is the charging section which provides that there shall be levied and collected in such manner as may be prescribed duties of excise on all excisable goods at the rates set forth in the First Schedule. 'Artificial or synthetic resins and ...
S. Kapur Vs. Bhalchandra G. Naik and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-14-1986
Reported in: 1986(2)BomCR624
G.D. Kamat, J.1. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and under section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code the applicant seeks to get the order made by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mapusa, dated 15th January, 1985 granting possession of a Motor Vehicle bearing No. MWU 2789 to the respondent No. 2 quashed and set aside. By that order the Judicial Magistrate, First Class directed the applicant to produce the said truck before the Court within 10 days from the date of the order and hand it over to the respondent No. 2.2. When this matter came for admission, rule was granted and status quo was ordered.3. From the stances taken by the parties it would be convenient to state facts. On 11th June, 1984 the applicant through his representative filed a complaint against the first respondent at the Mapusa Police Station that respondent No. 1 had removed the truck unlawfully and committed theft of the same. Hence the F.I.R. disclosed an offence under section 379 of India...
Usman Gulam Hyder Kadri Vs. Abdul Hamid Abdul Karim Sheikh and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-14-1986
Reported in: 1986(3)BomCR147
D.N. Mehta, J.1. This Civil Revision Application has been filed by the petitioner Usman Gulam Hyder Kadri impugning the order of the learned Civil Judge, (Junior Division), Shirpur, dated 1-10-1985, whereunder the learned Civil Judge was pleased to reject an application made by the defendants for the appointment of a Commissioner under Order XXVI, Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. The five respondents herein filed a suit in the Court of the learned Civil Judge, (Junior Division), at Shirpur, being Suit No. 101 of 1981, praying for possession of certain premises on the ground of bona fide requirement under section 13(1)(g) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging Houses Rates Control Act, 1947.3. In the course of the proceedings, an application was made on 30-9-1985 by the defendants for the appointment of a Commissioner for the purpose of 'inspecting the internal and external condition of all the properties of the ownership of the plaintiffs'. The learned Civil Judge felt that the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »