Mumbai Court December 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.
Dilawar Khan S/O Vazir Khan Pathan and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-1987
Reported in: 1988(3)BomCR121; 1988MhLJ259
S.N. Khatri, J.1. This judgment disposes of (i) accused' Criminal Appeal No. 1221/80 (ii) Criminal Revision Application No. 136/81 registered on the basis of the show cause notice issued by Raja Bhonsale, J., for enhancements of sentence and (iii) State's Criminal Appeal No. 161/81 for enhancement of the sentence.2. The present nine appellants (accused Nos. 1 to 9) and one Sk. Hakim (original accused No. 10) were tried before Shri V.N. Nimbalkar, Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad inter alia on charges under sections 302, 323, 324 and 149, Indian Penal Code. The learned Judge acquitted accused No. 10 outright. He has convicted accused Nos. 1 to 9 on various counts, including under sections 304-A, 324 and 323 read with section 149. It is not necessary to mention the details of sentences imposed on all counts. Suffice is to say that so far as the main counts under sections 304-A, 324-A and 323 read with section 149 are concerned, he has besides fines imposed uniform concurrent sentenc...
Finolex Gables Limited Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and Shri D.M. Meht ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-1987
Reported in: 1988(14)LC594(Bombay)
Dharmadhikari J.1. This petition is filed by the Petitioner-Company against the order passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Pune Division, Pune dated 27th of March, 1981 refusing to refund the claim, on the ground that the claim made was beyond the period of limitation prescribed by Rule 11 of the Rules.2. It appears from record that the refund claim was made by the petitioner-company for a period from 4th May, 1977 to 3rd of May, 1980, on the ground that there was an apparent mistake in classification of goods. It is not necessary to consider the various contentions raised before us in that behalf, in view of the decision of this Court in 1987 Mh. L. J. 900-R. Parthasarathy Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Kalyan Dn. and Anr. v. Dipsi Chemicals Private Limited & another. After making detailed reference to the various decisions in the field this is what the Division Bench has observed in paras 17 and 18 of the said judgments:17. It has also been brought to our notice...
Didwania Import and Export (P) Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-09-1987
Reported in: (1988)(38)ELT531Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appeal filed before the Central Board of Excise and Customs against order No. S/10-14/81F dated 10.2.1981 passed by the Collector of Customs, Bombay, statutorily stood transferred to the Tribunal for being heard as an appeal.2. The undisputed facts are: The appeallants imported 84 coils of G.P.sheets defective of C.I.F. value of Rs. 5,82,907.00 and sought clearance against 8 import licences, four of them were for a total value of Rs. 3,20,702.00 and the remaining four were for a total value of Rs. 2,62,205.00.3. The Customs House, however, objected to the clearance that out of the eight licences four licences of the total value of Rs. 2,62,205.00 were not valid to cover the import of defective sheets. Another ground of objection was that at the time of shipment the importers did not have licences and there was no evidence that they had made application for issue of licences prior to the date of shipment.4. The Collector of Customs who ordered confiscation after considering the ...
Damodar Kanji Soni Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-09-1987
Reported in: (1989)(39)ELT410Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appeals filed before the Gold Control Administrator against the order F.No. XVII(GC)8/60/80-2038, dated 18.6.1981 passed by the Collector of Customs (P) Bombay statutorily stood transferred to the Tribunal.2. As these two appeals arise out of a single order and as they involve common questions of law and facts, they are clubbed together, heard together, hence this common order.3. The facts required for the disposal of these appeals lie in a small compass: On 18.11.1980 the officers of the Gold Control, Bombay searched the business premises of the appellants who are brothers and the search resulted in the recovery of gold and gold ornaments weighing 2969.350 gms. in respect of which no accounts were maintained. The officers seized the said gold and gold ornaments under a panchnama.During the course of the investigations the statements of the present appellants as well as others were recorded. After the completion of the investigations and after issue of show cause notice, the Co...
B.S. Rawat, Assistant Collector of Customs, R and I (P), Bombay Vs. An ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-09-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)BomCR607; 1988(36)ELT60(Bom); 1988MhLJ445
1. This revision application is filed by Shri B. S. Rawat, Asstt. Collector of Customs, R & I (P), Bombay, challenging the order dated 7th November, 1987, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, releasing the respondents on bail. The learned Judge also directed that the said order should be made operative from 1 p.m. on 9th November, 1987. The petitioner moved this Court at 11 a.m. on 9th November, 1987, and this court granted stay, pending admission. Record of the proceedings was called for and the matter was put up for admission on 10th November, 1987. On 10th November, 1987, after hearing both the sides, rule was issued, interim stay was continued and the petition was peremptorily fixed for hearing on 19th November, 1987.2. Both the sides were heard for a considerable time on facts as well as on law.3. The facts of the case are as under :-On 4th March, 1987, Officers of the Air Intelligence Unit at Sahar Airport accosted respondent No. 2, Mrs. Aurora Mydlarz...
Rajbir Singh Santokh Singh and Vs. Collector of Customs (Prev.)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-08-1987
Reported in: (1988)(35)ELT122Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These two appeals arise out of and are directed against the Order No. VIII(b)10(43)-Cus.86 dated 10-12-1986 passed by the Additional Collector of Customs (Preventive), Bombay.2. As these appeals involve common questions of law and facts and they arise out of a single order they are clubbed together, heard together and hence this common order. On the basis of secret information, the officers of the D.R.I., Bombay Zonal Unit kept watch around Thane on the night of 13-1-1979 and intercepted two trucks bearing registration Nos. MHS-5179 and MWU-3765 They also apprehended one Shri Fakrudeen F. Shaikh from truck No. MHS-5179 and three persons by names Ramswaroop Bodhraj Bakshi, Kallu Munneshwar Yadav and Abdul Rashid Tolkar. Cursory examination of the trucks revealed that they were loaded with gunny bags containing textiles of foreign origin. The detailed examination and inventory were made at the Customs House. Truck No. MWU-3765 contained 86 packages containing textiles of foreign and ...
S.G. Chemicals and Vs. Collector of C.E.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-08-1987
Reported in: (1988)(19)LC62Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The revision application filed by the appellant before the Central Government against order No. 152 of 1980, dated 7-3-1980 passed by the Central Board of Excise and Customs statutorily stood transferred to the Tribunal for being heard as an appeal.2. When this appeal was taken up for consideration Shri Nadkarni sought an adjournment on the ground that the person acquainted with the facts of the case is at Baroda and could not attend the hearing. His request was rejected as the appeal relates to the year 1960. Heard Shri Senthivel.3. Stated briefly the facts are: On 13-2-1974 the Central Excise (Preventive) Officers of Baroda verified the stock of excisable goods bought by the S.G. Pharmaceuticals (Appellants) at concessional rate of duty for industrial use under the provision of Chapter X They noticed both excess as well as shortage of benzene, toluene and power alcohol.They seized 3066 litres of special denatured absolute alcohol with 2% benzene. During the course of investigatio...
Apex Marketing Federation Employees Union Vs. S.A. Patil and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-08-1987
Reported in: (1995)IIILLJ81Bom
Kurdukar, J. 1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order, dated 30th October 987, dismissing the Complaint (ULP) No. 1198 of 1986 filed by the petitioners. This complaint was filed complaining unfair labour practice under Items 3 and 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971.2. The learned Member of the Industrial Court has given cogent and satisfactory reasons while dismissing the complaint and I am in agreement with the reasons set out in the said order.3. Perused the affidavits filed by the parties in the proceedings.4. Dr. Kulkarni, the learned Counsel appearing in support of this petition firstly urged that there is no final decision as yet taken by the Government to shift the head office of the Second Respondent from Bombay to Nagpur. He urged that although Minister for Co-operation made a statement on the floor of the Assembly on 26th November1986. yet...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Arjun Tabadu Mahajan and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-08-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)BomCR603
V.P. Tipnis, J.1. This revision application by the State Government challenges the order dated 16th October, 1987 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule, in Criminal Appeal No. 96 of 1987.2. Range Forest Officer, Shahada, Dhule Forest Division, Dhule, filed a complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Shahada, for an offence under section 26(1)(d) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, against 49 persons. In the complaint, he mentioned that the accused persons have permitted their cattle numbering in 260 to graze in the reserved forest and have caused damage to the extent of Rs. 1,50,000/-. Due to the said trespass and grazing of the cattle, the grass in the reserved forest is consumed and the land is deteriorated. Young saplings in the specially cultivated nursery have been destroyed. Even the branches of the trees have been consumed by the cattle. The whole process has affected adversely the environment and the forest. The complaint further mentions that ...
Augustinno Fernandes Vs. Mamlatdar of Mormugao and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-1987
Reported in: (1988)IILLJ281Bom
1. The short question that this writ petition gives rise to is whether, after having issued a certificate under Section 33-C of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Labour Commissioner is entitled to modify the said certificate when the same was already before the Court of Recovery of Arrears of Land Revenue.2. The petitioner is an employee working for M/s. Chowgule Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd. By a letter dated 24th August, 1978, he was dismissed from service with immediate effect. An industrial dispute was raised, and, ultimately, the Industrial Tribunal, by award dated 11th December, 1985, set aside the punishment of dismissal and changed it to one of a week's suspension. Thereafter, the petitioner gave a notice dated 7th January, 1986 to the fifth respondent, demanding his reinstatement and payment of the back wages as awarded by the Industrial Tribunal. No reply was given by the fifth respondent and, therefore, the petitioner preferred an application under Section 33-C(1) of the In...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »