Skip to content

Mumbai Court August 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.

Aug 20 1986

N. Vaghul and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Aug-20-1986

Reported in: 1986(3)BomCR422

ORDER1. This petition, under Art. 227 and S. 482, Criminal P.C. 1973, is aimed at an order directing the issue of process against petitioners for the alleged commission of various offences punishable under the Penal Code.2. Respondent 2, complainant before the Magistrate, initiated a prosecution against the petitioners and two others for the alleged commission of offences punishable under sections 406, 420, 468 and 471 read with 109/120B, Penal Code. This complaint, briefly stated, is to the following effect :-Complainant was a businessman trading in the name and style of M/s. Navinchandra & Co. In his capacity as a businessman, he and his concerns were dealing with the processing of industrial diamonds, export of cut and polished diamonds, building construction, transport and quarrying. Despite these extensive and varied interests, complainant and his concerns were ignorant of the export business and never had anything to do with letters of Credit, hereinafter to be describes as 'L/Cs...


Aug 19 1986

Kewalramani Bros. Vs. Third Income-tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on: Aug-19-1986

Reported in: (1987)20ITD82(Mum.)

1. These three appeals by the assessee relate to the assessment years 1979-80, 1980-81 and 1982-83. On merits the point raised is common. The assessee claimed before the ITO that the amount received on sale of import entitlements was a capital receipt and was not liable to be treated as revenue receipt. This plea was not accepted by the ITO. The ITO observed that the import entitlements had been earned because of exports made by the assessee of certain commodities in a particular year. He further observed that many businessmen exported goods very often at lower rates or even at loss so as to obtain import entitlements which when utilised would grant them profits and compensate them for loss suffered earlier in export of goods.Consequently, the amount received on sale of import entitlements formed part of revenue receipts and that they did not constitute capital receipts.2. In the appeals filed by the assessee, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the point in controversy h...


Aug 18 1986

Elpro International Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs (Appeals)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on: Aug-18-1986

Reported in: (1987)(27)ELT100Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This appeal arises out of and is directed against the Order bearing No. S/49-407/82M dated 8-6-83 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay.2. It appears that the appellants imported 12 drums and cleared 9 drums. Bombay Port Trust issued shortlanding certificate in respect of one drum. Two drums were not traced and a missing certificate was also issued by the BPT in respect of those two drums. Since five drums were found dented, a joint survey was held in presence of BPT and the survey disclosed shortage of 541 kgs. The appellants sought refund of customs duty in respect of shortlanded missing drums as well as the shortage noticed during this joint survey. The Asstt. Collector ordered refund in respect of shortlanded drum. As regards missing drums, the Asstt.Collector made an observation "shortage was not brought to the notice of the Customs before the Out of Charge Order was passed." He, however, stated that the matter was still under consideration. As regards shortage,...


Aug 18 1986

Bhalchandra Keshav Gadre Vs. Gurushant Gangadhar Kamble

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Aug-18-1986

Reported in: 1986(3)BomCR657; 1989(25)LC81(Bombay)

1. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution read with Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Petitioner who is Accused No. 36 in Criminal Case No. 9 of 1986 filed by the 1st Respondent against M/s. Kirloskar Brothers Ltd. and Others, prays for a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction for quashing the process issued against the petitioner by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Pune on 31st January 1986. My learned predecessor Mehta, J. issued Rule and made it returnable on 16-6-1986.2. In another Criminal Writ Petition No. 335 of 1986 filed by Shri Marathe, accused No. 17 in Criminal Case No. 9 of 1986 I have delivered my order on 21-7-1986. The said Shri Marathe is accused No. 17 in the complaint case filed by the 1st respondent. Even though the present petition also arises out of the same complaint cases, I am delivering this separate order as the facts relating to this petitioner, accused No. 36 are slightly different.3. The f...


Aug 18 1986

Saikh Mahboob Saikh Omer Vs. Patna Gangadhar Mahalappa and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Aug-18-1986

Reported in: 1987(2)BomCR37

R.A. Jahagirdar, J.1. This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging the order dated 8th of November, 1985 passed by the learned Additional District Judge of Nanded in Election Petition No. 11 of 1985. The facts leading to the election petition must, therefore, be necessarily stated before appreciating the point that has been raised on behalf of the petitioner in this petition.2. Elections to the Municipality of Biloli in Nanded district were held and certain number of Municipal Councillors, amongst whom respondent No. 1 is one, took their seats. The Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965, which governs the Constitution of the Municipal Councils, provides in section 9 that every Council shall consists of Councillors elected at ward elections; and shall also include Councillors co-opted by the elected Councillors in the prescribed manner from amongst persons who are entitled to vote at the municipal election. In other words, after the Councillors are elected, they ar...


Aug 14 1986

Gokaldas Harbhagawandas Vs. Collector of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on: Aug-14-1986

Reported in: (1987)(10)LC17Tri(Mum.)bai

1. M/s. Gokaldas Harbhagawandas have tiled Revision Applications to the Government of India under old Section 131 of the Customs Act and these have to be treated as appeals to the Tribunal. The appeal registered under CD(T)(BOM)/ 161/1980 is in terms of old Section 131(1)(b) of the Customs Act against the Order No. SG 86/5/A/77 A, dated 18-4-1977 passed by the Collector of Customs, Bombay in terms of old Section 130 of the Customs Act reviewing the clearance of a consignment of Polyester Filament Yarn under B/E No. 2148/652 dated 3-1-1978 per s.s."State of Andhra Pradesh" Cash No. 2282 dated 7-2-1978 imported by the appellants and levying a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on them Under Section 112 of the Customs Act for the illegal import of the consignment. The other two appeals registered under CD(T)233/1980 and CD431/1980 are against the orders of the Collector levying fines in lieu of confiscation of the consignments of identical goods imported by the same importers as confirmed by the Bo...


Aug 14 1986

Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Smt. Shantabi ...

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Aug-14-1986

Reported in: AIR1989Bom46

Dr. G.F. Couto, J.1. Whether the provisions of section 92A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), are applicable even to pending cases relating to accidents that took place prior to its coming into force is the short but interesting question that this appeal by the original sixth respondent gives rise to and that falls for my determination.2. A traffic accident took place on August 9, 1982, and as a result thereof, the husband of respondent No. 1 and the father of respondents Nos. 2 and 6 herein came to die. By an application dated January 28, 1983, the said respondents sought compensation under section 110A of the Act and, thereafter, by another application dated July 21, 1983, they sought the benefit given by the newly introduced section 92A. This application was allowed by order dated August 5, 1983, and the Presiding Officer of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Margao, accordingly ordered the appellant and the National Insurance Co. Ltd. to deposit, ...


Aug 14 1986

Satyapal Vs. Wool and Woollen Export Promotion Council and Another

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Aug-14-1986

Reported in: [1987]169ITR507(Bom)

S.K. Desai, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the decision of the writ judge given on September 11, 1984. The writ petition was one whereunder, the appellant-original petitioner challenged the termination order dated 21, 1981, issued to him by the 1st respondent purporting to act under rule 24 of the Service Rules. By an amendment made at the stage of appeal, the appellant has impugned the vires of the said rule on the ground that it is inconsistent with article 14 of the Constitution of India and hence ultra vires.2. This contention of the appellant is required to be upheld in view of the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Central Inland Water Transport Corporation Ltd. v. B. N. Ganguly [1986] 53 FLR 523 . Rule 24, which is challenged before us, is identical with the rule which was under consideration by the Supreme Court and following the Supreme Court's decision, we will have to declare the said rule invalid. If that be so, it would follow that the termination order issued ...


Aug 14 1986

Rahuri Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra ...

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Aug-14-1986

Reported in: 1987(1)BomCR168

C.S. Dharmadhikari, J.1. Since all these writ petitions involve common questions of law and facts, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgement.2. The petitioners in these Writ Petitions, who are either co-operative sugar factories or sugarcane growers, have challenged the order issued by the State Government on 12th September, 1984, known as the Maharashtra Sugar Factories (Reservation of Areas and Regulation of Crushing and Sugarcane Supply) Order, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as 'the order') It is contended by the petitioners that the impugned order is outside the scope of the Essential Commodities Act or the Sugar Control Order, 1966 issued by the Central Government. The said order is also violative of the petitioner's fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners in Writ Petition No. 4897 of 1984, the Rahuri Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., have also challenged Schedule 37 of the impugned order, o...


Aug 14 1986

Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shantabai S. Dhume an ...

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Aug-14-1986

Reported in: I(1987)ACC453; (1986)88BOMLR689; [1989]65CompCas206(Bom); 1987MhLJ35

1. Whether the provision of S. 92-A, Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is applicable even to pending cases relating to accidents that took place prior to its coming into force is the short but interesting question that this appeal by the original sixth respondent gives rise to and that falls for my determination.2. A traffic accident took place on 9-8-1982, and as a result thereof, the husband and the father of respondents 1 to 6 herein came to die. By an application dated 28-1-1983, the said respondent sought a compensation under S. 110-A of the Act and, thereafter by another application dated 21-7-1983, they sought the benefits given by the newly introduced S 92-A. This application was allowed by order dated 5-8-1983 and the Presiding Officer of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Margao accordingly ordered the appellant and the National Insurance Company Limited to deposit, each of them, a sum of Rs. 7,500 to be paid to respondents 1 to 6 in case they ...


  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial