Mumbai Court September 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.
Bhawsar Home Furnishers and Decorators Vs. Dattaram Pandurang Mistri a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1987
Reported in: (1987)89BOMLR561; (1993)IIILLJ702Bom; 1988MhLJ210
H.H. Kantharia, J.1. As common questions of facts and law are involved in these ten writ petitions, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The first respondents in all the petitions (hereinafter referred to as 'the workmen') were in the employment of the petitioners for diverse number of years ranging from 1949 to 1970. Their services were terminated from 1st July, 1978. Earlier, they were laid off for 37 days in 1976, 95 days in 1977 and 59 days in 1978 till the end of June without any wages. They were not paid bonus for the years 1975, 1976 and 1977. Even their earned wages for some time and the C.D.S. amounts were not paid. Payment of gratuity amount at the time of termination of their services was also not made. They, therefore, filed applications under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') in the Labour Court for computation of money due to them on account of wages for 191 days for no work in the years 1976, 1977 ...
Mulchand Sampatraj Shah Vs. Dayashankar, Assistant Collector of Custom ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1987
Reported in: 1988(35)ELT458(Bom)
G.F. Couto, J.1. The above three criminal miscellaneous applications directed against the same Order dated 4th September, 1986, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Daman, issuing process against the petitioners and others in a customs case under section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962, filed against them by the respondent No. 1, give rise to the same issues. Hence, this common judgment.2. The first respondent filed a criminal complaint for offences punishable under section 135 of the Customs Act against the petitioners as well as against one Haribhai Vallabhbhai Tandel and one Nitin Ramanlal Shah alias 'Popat' on the ground that on information received by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Delhi, that one D'Souza who was wanted in connection with the seizure of 2 kgs. of hasish was staying at Maurya Hotel at Delhi, the Room No. 645 of the said Hotel was searched on 20th April, 1982. D'Souza, one Jogi Mangal and one Haribhai Tandel were found in the said room and ...
isac Santan Fernandes Vs. K.P. Reghuvanshi, Deputy Commissioner of Pol ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1987
Reported in: 1987(3)BomCR323
V.P. Tipnis, J.1. The order dated 31st March, 1987, passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone-III, Kalyan, District Thane, externing the petitioner is impugned in the present petition.2. The notice under section 59 of the Bombay Police Act catalogued tow offences, one of 1986 under section 37 of the Bombay Police Act and the other of 1985 under sections 302, 147, 148, 149 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code both pending in the Court. The notice further mentions that due to the petitioner, an atmosphere of fear has been created against the residents of Chola and Thakurli and nobody dares to openly give evidence against the petitioner. In the final order of externment, it is mentioned that the petitioner is accustomed to the conduct of creating danger to the peace in the locality and, therefore, the residents, traders and professions of the Dombivli city, Thakurli village and in the surrounding area are exposed to danger to their person and property. After cataloging the two offence...
Jeevan Pandurang Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1987
Reported in: 1987(3)BomCR325
C.S. Dharmadhikari, Ag. C.J.1. In this Writ Petition the order of exterment passed by the Deputy Police Commissioner, New Bombay, dated the 15th of March, 1986 is challenged on various grounds.2. It appears to be an admitted position that initially a show cause notice came to be issued against in all twelve persons by the Deputy Police Superintendent on the 16th of October, 1985. It also appears from the record that it was not pursued. The second show cause notice came to be issued on the 14th of February, 1986. Admittedly, the second show cause notice is based on different allegations and is restricted to the petitioner only. It also appears to be an admitted position that the petitioner is a trade union leader and there was a trade union rivalry in the industry known as Messrs. Skol Breweries Ltd. situate at Kegaon, Uran, District Raigad. It is the case of the petitioner that because the petitioner and his associates are members of CITU, i.e. Centre of Indian Trade Union, at the inst...
Padam Bahadur Khanka Vs. National Institute for Training and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-1987
Reported in: (1995)IIILLJ77Bom
H.H. Kantharia, J 1. An order dated 17th December, 1984 passed by the fourth respondent being the Member of the Industrial Court, Maharashtra, Bombay, dismissing the Revision Application filed by the petitioner under Section 44 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, is under challenge in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. The only point that has been canvassed before me by Mr. Choudhary, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner is as to whether the Central Government or the State Government would be 'appropriate Government' in respect of respondent No. 1 National Institute for Training in Industrial Engineering Society. In the submission of Mr. Choudhary, the conclusion arrived at by the fourth respondent, that appropriate Government in this case is the Central Government is wrong and the impugned order suffers from error apparent on the face of the record. The submission is that the Soc...
Indian Overseas Bank Vs. Shreekrishna Woollen Mills Pvt. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Bom343; (1987)89BOMLR510
ORDER1. This is a Chamber Summons taken out by the defendants for an order that the plaintiffs should be directed to produce on oath the documents, correspondence and papers as set out in prayer (a) to the Chamber Summons and for an order and direction that the plaintiffs should give inspection of these documents to the defendants on production.2. The plaintiffs are Indian Overseas Bank while the defendants are Shreekrishna Woollen Mills Pvt. Ltd. and other persons.3. The plaintiff-Bank has filed the suit on or about 12th Dec. 1986 to recover from the defendants various amounts totalling approximately Rs. 16 crores which were advanced by the plaintiff-Bank to the defendants, together with interest. No written Statement has been filed so far. The defendants had taken out an earlier Chamber Summons being Chamber Summons No. 35 of 1987, inter alia, for inspection of these very documents. In that Chambers Summons an order was passed on 4th Mar. 1987 by a learned single Judge of this Court ...
Rupchand Rajaram Shah Vs. Janata Consumers Co-operative Society Ltd. a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Bom193
1. A short question of law that arises for decision in this appeal is whether the time taken by a party to a suit before the Registrar under Section 93 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act can be excluded for the purpose of computing the period of limitation under Section 14(1) of the Limitation Act. A few facts giving rise to the said issue may be stated.2. The Appellant is the original Plaintiff. The Respondent No. 1 who was the original Defendant No. 1 is a Co-operative Society of which the respondent No. 2 who was the original Defendant No. 2 was Chairman and the Respondents Nos. 3 to 10 who were original Defendants Nos. 3 to 10 were the members of the Managing Committee. The Plaintiff on 16th May, 1961 advanced to Defendant No. 1 Rs. 6000/- and on 9th October, 1961 further sum of Rs. 4000/- by way of deposits on interest at 6% per annum. The said deposit amounts were repayable within three months. The Defendants did not repay the said amounts, the Plaintiff therefore issu...
Bapurao S/O Narayan Jatale Vs. Mahadeo S/O Govinda Mali and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1987
Reported in: 1988(3)BomCR52
V.A. Mohta, J.1. Widow Bainabai, by a Will, dated 29th August, 1968, bequeathed her agricultural land to her brother's sons. She died on 10th February, 1974. Bapurao Jatale (the petitioner) was in occupation of the field as a tenant since 1959-60. After the death of a testator, the legatees Mahadeo Mali and three others (the respondents) applied for resumption of land for their personal cultivation under section 38, read with section 36(2) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958 (the Act of 1958). All the revenue authorities allowed the application. Objection of the tenant, that the legatees being transferees after 1st August, 1957, could not resume land in view of restrictions imposed under section 38(3)(d), was over-ruled, holding that those restrictions were not attracted as land was not leased to the tenant on 1st August, 1957. Such a view was taken on the basis of a Single Judge decision of this Court in the case of Annapurnabai wd/o Digambar Joshi...
Tukaram Yeshwant Patil (Dr.) Vs. Bhagwantrao Gaikwad and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1987
Reported in: 1987(3)BomCR327
P.B. Sawant, J.1. This is an unfortunate case where the petitioner who is the head of the department, as Director of Horticulture, has been kept under suspension for months together pending the departmental inquiry which has not yet even started, and he has only six months to go before he reaches the superannuation age.2. On July 10, 1986, the Hon'ble Minister in-charge of the department declared on the floor of the Assembly that the petitioner was suspended on account of the proposed departmental inquiry, and on the same day the order of his suspensions was issued. On July 30, 1986 the present petition was filed challenging the suspension, and it was admitted by this Court on August 11, 1986. At the time of the admission, the Court was informed by the Government that they would complete the inquiry within six months. Although the period of six months expired on January 10, 1987, not even the chargesheet was served on the petitioner with the result that on January 14, 1987 the Advocate...
Krushi Goseva Sangh and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1987
Reported in: 1987(3)BomCR713; 1988MhLJ293
C.S. Dharmadhikari, Acg. C.J.1. This writ petition is filed by Krushi Go-Seva Sangh, Malegaon a social organisation and another, for a writ of mandamus directing respondent No. 1 the State of Maharasthra to frame a scheme for effective implementation of the provisions of the Maharasthra Animal Preservation Act, 1976. A further direction is also sought for making arrangement for preservation and maintenance of animals during the tendency of the trial through social organizations, like the petitioner No. 1 Krushi Go-Seva Sangh, Ejaz Ahmed Kallu alias Zhinka, Abdul Bari and Subhan Khan who claim to be the traders, dealing in the business of sale and purchase of cattle at Malegaon made applications for intervention which came to be allowed.2. It is the case of the petitioners that at Malegaon and several other places in Nasik District, flagrant breaches of the provisions of sections 6 and 7 of the Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act, 1976 are being committed and no action is being taken by...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »