Mumbai Court January 1987 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.
Charan Brothers Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-1987
Reported in: (1987)(13)ECC213
1. This appeal arises out of and is directed against order-in-appeal bearing No. S/49-235/86-L(ACU) dated 25-6-1986 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay.2. The appellants M/s. Charan Brothers imported medical instruments, such as, Endo Cardial and Cardiac Pulse Generator, Programmer totally valued at Rs. 66,957/- and sought clearance under OGL under Appendix 6 of the A.M. Policy 1985-88. The Customs, however, objected to the clearance of programmer only on the ground that it was not covered by Appendix 6. The Asstt. Collector of Customs, Air Cargo who held the adjudication ordered confiscation on the ground that the programmer is not a permanent attachment required for Pace Maker and therefore it is not an accessory. He, however, allowed redemption on payment of fine of Rs. 7,500/-. On appeal, the Collector (Appeals) rejected the appeal by observing :- "I have gone through the certificates and find that these certificates very clearly indicate that the Programmer is no...
Nagpur Electric Light and Power Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-ta ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-1987
Reported in: [1988]171ITR33(Bom)
Bharucha, J.1. The assessee was a company carrying on the business of generating and supplying electric energy in Nagpur and Wardha. It did so under a licence granted under the provisions of Indian Electricity Act, 1910. The Maharashtra State Electricity Board served upon it a notice exercising the option to purchase the Wardha undertaking conferred by the licence. The possession of Wardha undertaking was conferred by the licence. The possession of the Wardha undertaking was delivered by the assessee to the Board on the midnight of March 11, 1967/March 12, 1967.2. On May 22, 1967, an agreement was arrived at between the assessee and the Board which recorded the exercise of the option. The agreement stated that the assesee would sell and the Board would purchase the assessee's assets which are broadly classified into lands, buildings, plant and machinery, furniture and fixtures, stores and materials, etc. The purchase price, the agreement stipulated, would be determined at the market va...
Raghunath Krishna Mujumale and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)BomCR346; (1987)89BOMLR204; 1987MhLJ412
S.N. Khatri, J.1. This is an appeal by the original accused from the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, (Shri S.S. Pathak) convicting them under sections 302/34 and 323/34 I.P.C. and sentencing them to life imprisonment and R.I. for six months and a fine of Rs. 300/- or in default R.I. for one month on the two counts.2. The first three appellants- Raghunath, Popat and Baban-are real brothers. Appellant No. 4 Leelabai is wife of the 1st appellant. The deceased Laxman Ramchandra Mujumale is their Kinsman. The incident in question occurred at Kondhapur, Haveli Taluka in Pune District on 5th February, 1983 around 9 in the field of one Baban Gangaram Mujumale (hereinafter called B.G.M. to distinguish from appellant No. 3). The appellants own agricultural land at village Kondhapur. They have their residential hut in the land itself. To the North of this hut at a distance of about 50 feet is situated a well. To the further North of the well, is the land of the deceased. The...
G. Chandrashekhar Reddy Vs. Marathwada University and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)BomCR409
G.H. Guttal, J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner G. Chandrashekhar Reddy---a student of the College of Engineering, Ternanagar, in District Osmanabad, seeks an order directing respondent No. 1---Marathwada University, Aurangabad---that he be held eligible for admission to the first year engineering course at the above mentioned college which is respondent No. 2 to this petition.I. The Petitioner's Case2. The petitioner passed the Xth standard examination from Boy's Town School, Hyderabad, in Andhra Pradesh in March, 1982. The course of XIIth standard education in Andhra Pradesh is known as the Examination of the Board of Intermediate Education. It comprises of two years' course which corresponds to XIth and XIIth standards of the Maharashtra State Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board. He passed the two years' examination course in March, 1984. He was admitted to respondent No. 2---Engineering College of Ternanagar, in July 1985...
Bhagwan S/O Ganpatrao Godsay Vs. Kachrulal S/O Bastimal Samdariya
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)BomCR153
G.H. Guttal, J.1. These four revision applications have beed placed before us for hearing upon a reference made by Ratnaparkhi, J., who differed from the view adopted by S.J. Deshpande, J., on the construction of Rule 3-A of Order XLI of the Code of Civil Procedure. At the outset, Counsel for the petitioners and respondents agreed that we should dispose of not only the question of construction of Rule 3-A of Order XLI but all the question arising in these civil revision applications so that the civil revision applications need not be sent back to a Single Judge for disposal in accordance with our decision.I Facts(i) Civil Revision Application No. 6 of 19862. In this Revision Application, petitioner is the owner of house bearing Municipal No. 2/771 situated at Tilak Road, Beed. Respondent Kachrulal is the tenant. The petitioner filed eviction Suit No. 85/RC/8 under section 15 of the Hyderabad Rent Control Act, 1954 on the ground of non-payment of rent and acquisition of alternative acco...
Raghunath S/O Bondraji Beldar Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-1987
Reported in: 1987(3)BomCR106
B.G. Deo, J.1 An interesting point involved in this appeal is when an accused has been acquitted of the offence under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, i.e. for rape whether he can be convicted of the offence under section 354 of the Indian Penal Code on the same set of facts.2. The appellant was acquitted of the offence under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khamgaon, on 30-3-1982. There was one other accused by name Janardhan accused No. 2 who was similarly acquitted of the said charge. The allegation against both the appellants were that on 21-12-1981 at Shahapur they committed rape on P.W. 2 Rushikala. P.W. 2 Rushikala was born on 30-8-1966 and was 15 years and 8 months old on the day of the offence.3. I have heard Shri Palshikar learned Counsel for the appellant and Shri Gadkari learned A.G.P. (Public Prosecutor) for the State.4. The prosecution story about both the accused in secession having committed rape on P.W. 2 Rushikala was negativ...
Vishwanathsa Narayansa Kshatriya Vs. Shah Chhaganlal Ugarchand Akolkar ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-22-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Bom301; 1987MhLJ287
ORDER1. This petition has been filed by the original defendat 2 seeking to challenge the Judgment and Order dt. 2nd May 1981 of the Court of the Joint Civil Judge, S. D. Nasik passed below Exh. 57 rejecting the claim of the defendant No. 2 to add the respondent 6 the third party as a party to the suit under the provisions of Order 8, Rule 23 of the Civil P.C.2. Respondents 1 to 3, the original plaintiffs filed against the respondent 4 being defendant 1, the petitioner being defendant 2 and respondent 5 being defendant 3, the aforesaid suit for recovery, of a sum of Rs. 16,30,925.41 paise. It was their case that they were carrying on their business inter alia of buying and selling tobacco. The third party respondents BhikusaYamasa Kshatriya Private Limited had from time to time bought tobacco and tobacco leaves from the plaintiffs, On an account being taken it was found that an amount of Rs. 17,44,619/- was due and payable by the said third party Company to the plaintiffs. The defendant...
Aruna S. Pardeshi (Dr.) Vs. Dean, Swami Ramanand Tirth Medical College ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-22-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)BomCR311
G.H. Guttal, J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks an order that she is entitled to admission to the Post Graduate Degree Course namely : M.D. in Obstetrics and Gynaecology in the place of respondent No. 3 at Swami Ramanand Tirth Medical College at Ambajogai.2. The facts relevant for considerations of the petition are these, the petitioner passed her M.B.B.S. Examination in December, 1982. On 4th January, 1984, she completed her Intership and registered as Medical Practitioner with Registration No. 51450.After a short term as Houseman in Bombay, she was appointed as House Surgeon in Obstetrics and Gynaecology at the Swami Ramanand Tirth Medical College, Ambajogai, on 1st September, 1984, where she continued to work upto 15th February, 1985. From 26th February, 1985 to 31st July, 1985 she held House-Post in General Surgery in the same College. However, she continued to work in the House-Post in General Surgery for 12 days from 1st Aug...
Miheer Hemant Mafatlal Vs. Mafatlal Industries Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-22-1987
Reported in: (1987)89BOMLR86
M.H. Kania, C.J.1. This is an appeal against a judgment and order of a learned single judge dated October 20, 1986 dismissing the Appellants' Notice of Motion No. 2264 of 1986 taken out in the aforesaid Suit No. 2614 of 1986 filed on the Original Side of this Court. Although the appeal is against the dismissal of Notice of Motion, it is agreed by counsel that the decision in this appeal will govern the decision of the suit, and that the suit should be treated as disposed of by the decision in this appeal. Counsel on behalf of both the parties agreed that the suit shall be disposed of as aforesaid without leading any oral evidence and that all points not taken up before us were expressly given up.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal lie within a fairly narrow compass. The respondent Company, namely Mafatlal Industries Limited (referred to hereinafter as 'the said Company') is a Public Limited Company incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1913. The said Compan...
Sunder Parmanand Lalvani Vs. Shreepad Moreshwar Velkar and Official As ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-22-1987
Reported in: (1987)89BOMLR94
S.K. Desai, J.1. This is an appeal by the appellant-original judgment-debtor impugning an adjudication order made on January 28, 1986 by the Insolvency Court. It is pertinent to note that at the stage when the order of adjudication was made, the advocate for the debtor withdrew or rested content with the bald statement that he had no instructions and had not even filed an affidavit in reply opposing the order sought. This shows clear non-application of mind and we feel that if at that stage or even at the earlier stage when the respondent (substituted petitioning creditor) was substituted, had the advocate on behalf of the insolvent drawn attention of the Court to the points urged in the appeal, the Court might have refrained from passing the order of substitution and certainly the order of adjudication.2. A few facts may be stated. The original petition was filed by Addison-Wesley Publishing Company Incorporated, a company incorporated under the laws of Commonwealth of Massachusetts, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »