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.
Mahmood Medhar Khan Alias Maherdeen Khan Alias Mohamad MoherdIn Vs. Go ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1987
Reported in: 1988(2)BomCR378
M.M. Qazi, J.1. All these there writ petitions can be disposed of by this common order, since the point involved is common.2. The petitioners in the above petitions has challenged the order of detention dated 16-2-1987 passed by the Officer on Special Duty and Ex-Officio Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra, Home Department, in exercise of powers under sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (52 of 1974) read with Government order, Home Department (Special) No. SPL-3 (A)/PSA-1186/1 dated 20th October 1986. Mr. Paliwal has challenged the impugned order on several grounds. However, in our view, it is not necessary to deal with all those challenges, since the petitions can be allowed in view of the ground (VI) which is reproduced below :'(VI) The petitioner submits that the impugned order suffers from non-application of mind. The impugned order shows that till 4-12-1986 the petitioner was in jail, but it i...
Pure Drinks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1987
Reported in: 1987(3)BomCR231; 1989(22)LC589(Bombay)
Sujata V. Manohar, J.1. The plaintiffs manufacture soft drinks i.e. non alcoholic beverages and carbonated beverages. At all material times they marketed their products under the name of Coca Cola, Fanta and Soda Special.2. Prior to 1970 the plaintiffs' beverages were not liable to any excise duty. Under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 the excise duty was levied for the first time on aerated waters with effect from 1st March, 1970 when new Item 1-D was introduced in the First Schedule to the said Act. Thereafter the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Bombay Division IV, called upon the plaintiffs to file a price-list of the products manufactured by the plaintiffs. Thereupon the plaintiffs furnished the necessary price lists from time to time. The price lists furnished by the plaintiffs mentioned that the plaintiffs were supplying their products to the wholesale dealers through the plaintiffs' salesmen in the plaintiffs' trucks and that no discount or commission was being paid ...
Santosh Giridhar Acharekar Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ1893
C.S. Dharmadhikari, Ag.C.J.1. In this petition, the order of detention dated the 16th of April 1987 issued under the provisions of the National Security Act is challenged on various grounds. It is contended by Shri Lonkar, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, that a true translation of the medico-legal document was not supplied to detenu which resulted in non-communication of the ground within the contemplation of Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India. It is the case of the detenu that while supplying the translation in Marathi of an injury report of Balu, certain portion was wholly omitted, which means that there was no communication to the detenu of the recitals of the said document which has prejudicially affected his right to make an effective representation. It support of this contention, the detenu has placed strong reliance upon the decision of this Court in Criminal Writ Petition No. 555 of 1987 (Sunil Ganpat Mangule v. Shri D.S. Soman, Commissioner of Police and Ors.) deci...
Bhagwan Dhondu Tarkar Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-04-1987
Reported in: (1993)IIILLJ686Bom
H. H. Kantharia, J.1. In these four petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, facts are common and the law points are the same and, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The petitioners, in all the writ petitions, were in the employment of the second respondent. They were charge-sheeted on 24th November, 1981, inter alia, alleging against them that they assaulted one D.T. Jadhav, second respondent's Security Officer/Incharge, near Vasai Railway Station on 15th November, 1981 at about 6.30 p.m. The charge framed against them was 'riotous or disorderly behaviour during working hours at the establishment or any act subversive of discipline'. The petitioners submitted their written explanations on 30th November, 1981 denying the charges levelled against them as false and fabricated and further contending that they were being victimised for their trade union activities. The petitioners were suspended pending domestic enquiries. Thereafter, domestic enquirie...
Dattatraya Satwaji Narwane Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-04-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)BomCR704; 1988MhLJ279
B.N. Deshmukh, J.1. The petitioner has passed 12th Std. examination and has secured 72% marks in aggregate in mathematics group i.e. in the subjects of physics, chemistry and mathematics and he applied for the admission to B.E. Degree Course in Government College of Engineering at Aurangabad. The petitioner belongs to scheduled caste reserved category. In the petition, the petitioner had contended that even though persons in that reserved category who have secured less number of marks and percentage than the petitioner have been admitted. The petitioner is not admitted to the engineering degree Course on the ground that the petitioner has remained absent at the time of scrutiny as provided by Rule 6(1)(b) of the Rules for admission to the First Year degree courses in engineering and technology for the year 1987-88.2. In para 4 of the petition, the petitioner has given the names of various students who have scored less number of marks in the relevant group than the petitioner. Out of wh...
Sita Vithaldas Thariani Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-03-1987
Reported in: (1988)(34)ELT696Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The revision application filed before the Central Govt. against the order-in-appeal bearing No. S/49-350/82-P, dated 30-6-1982 passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs, Bombay, statutorily stood transferred to the Tribunal for being heard as an appeal.2. The subject of challenge in this appeal is the absolute confiscation of a gold chain with the locket containing gold biscuit having the inscription of a bird on one side and credit suisse 5 tolas fine gold 999.9 on the other side. The appellant at the relevant time was a non-resident Indian. On her arrival, she declared all the baggage items including the gold chain with 5 tolas gold biscuit. The Assistant Collector of Customs permitted the facility under TBRE in respect of gold bangles but did not allow TBRE facility in respect of gold chain which had the locket with a gold biscuit. He held the gold chain is a crude jewellery and, therefore, it is prohibited item for import. On that ground he ordered absolute confiscation of t...
Shankar Savlaram Ambekar Vs. Shakti Insulated Wires (Pvt.) Ltd. and Ot ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-03-1987
Reported in: (1988)IILLJ416Bom
Vaze1. Shakti Insulated Wires (Private), Ltd., as the name suggests, is an industrial unit engaged in the manufacture of insulated wires. Wires for turbines being one of their products, the company has to conform to the standards laid down by the Indian Standards Institute. Whether the product conforms to the standard is checked at every stage of manufacture, such as in the covering department, enameling department and finally in the quality control department.2. Shankar Ambekar joined the company when he was an under-graduate. Being an ambitions young man, Shankar proceeded with his studies while earning and obtained his degree of Bachelor of Science when he was appointed in the quality control department as a tester. In December 1979, he was transferred first as an operator to the covering department and then to the enameling department in January 1980. Shankar worked for a couple of months in the enameling department but on 8 March 1980, reported back to the quality control departme...
Gaurishankar Vishwakarma Vs. Eagle Spring Industries Pvt. Ltd. and ors ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-03-1987
Reported in: (1994)IIILLJ689Bom
Sawant, J. 1. The decision under challenge is of the IVth Labour Court under the Industrial Disputes Act. Briefly stated the facts are that the petitioner-workman was working as a miller in the 1st respondent company's factory for about 6 to 7 years prior to the refusal of work to him on and from April 3rd, 1980. It appears that the workman worked upto April 2nd, 1980, and when he went to report for duty as usual on 3rd April 1980, he was asked not to resume the duties and was told that he would be intimated later as to when he should resume the duty The workman approached for work on two or three occasions thereafter but having failed to get any response from the employer, ultimately, on May 8, 1980, approached the Government Labour Officer. The matter having not been settled at that stage, it was taken in conciliation. The conciliator made his failure report and hence there was a reference of the dispute to the Labour Court. The Labour Court, by its impugned Order, held that it was t...
Vinod Ambalal Patel Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-03-1987
Reported in: 1987(3)BomCR513
C.S. Dharmadhikari, Ag.C.J.1. In this case the order of externment dated 28th August, 1985 issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Crime Branch, C.I.D. Greater Bombay, under section 57 of the Bombay Police Act is challenged mainly on the ground that the convictions referred to in the show cause notice and the order are too stale to arrive at a conclusion that the externee is likely to indulge in similar activities. In support of this contention, Shri Ghorwadkar, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner (appointed) placed reliance upon a decision of the Supreme Court in State of Bombay v. Vishnu Ramchandra, : 1961CriLJ450 . On the other hand, it is contended by Shri Chopda, the learned Public Prosecutor, that after externee was convicted on 14th June, 1982 and was released from the jail sometime in October 1983, he was again found indulging in similar activities and came to be apprehended on 7th August, 1985 which clearly shows that he had continued the similar activities a...
Sidram Yellappa Jadhav Vs. Narsinggirji Mills and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-02-1987
Reported in: (1995)IIILLJ352Bom
Sawant, J.1. These are two writ petitions challenging the orders passed by the Industrial Court in two different appeals under the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946. Since the question of law as well as of facts involved in both the petitions are common, by consent they are being disposed of by this common Judgment.2. The Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2922 of 1980 was employed with the 1st Respondent Mill as an unskilled worker for about 12 years till he was dismissed on 5th Sept., 1976. The dismissal was effected as a consequence of a departmental inquiry instituted on a charge which was vague as it could be. The charge states that 'the management had a grave suspicios that the Petitioner had so in the mill-premises counterfeit canteen coupons on a large scale and thus put the company to a financial loss. The selling of counterfeit coupons in the premises of the mill for cash without the permission of the management was illegal and hence the Petitioner had committed an offence o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »