Mumbai Court February 1988 Judgments
Santosh Dattaram Nadkarni, Bombay Vs. New India Industries Ltd. and An ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-29-1988
Reported in: (1988)IILLJ392Bom
Sawant, J.1. These are two cross writ petitions. Writ Petition No. 2284 of 1986 is by the employee and Writ Petition No. 5902 of 1986 is by the employer and they arise out of the award of the Industrial Tribunal. The facts in brief are as follows :The employee was recruited on July 7, 1976 as a Trainee Helper in the Finishing Department. On September 1, 1977 he was recruited in the said establishment on probation and was confirmed in service on December 1, 1977. His services however were terminated with effect from January 27, 1982 for loss of confidence. He raised an industrial dispute which was eventually referred to the Industrial Tribunal. Before the Tribunal, the employer-company led evidence to show that they were forced to terminate the employee's services because the workmen in the company had pressurised them to do so by threatening to go on strike. The cause of the workmen's wrath against the employee was that the employee was against the settlement which was arrived at betwe...
Tag this Judgment!Sulochana W/O Madhukar Joshi Vs. Gurubachansingh Saransingh
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-29-1988
Reported in: 1988(3)BomCR283; 1989MhLJ803
B.N. Deshmukh, J.1. This appeal is filed by the appellant against the judgment of the Tribunal disallowing her claim for compensation under section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act.2. An application came to be filed for adding Oriental Fire & General Insurance Company as a party to the proceedings.3. The Insurance Company was served and Shri A.A. Joshi appears for it in the civil application. He contends that the entire evidence is recorded without the Insurance Company being party to the proceedings and, therefore, on the basis of evidence already recorded, no findings should be arrived at so as to bind the Insurance Company.4. It is an admitted position that the vehicle which is alleged to have caused the accident is registered with Oriental Fire & General Insurance Company Ltd. The Insurance Company is a necessary party to the proceedings under section 92-A.5. The learned Counsel Shri Kapadia, appearing for the respondent, objected for adding the Insurance Company as a party in appeal...
Tag this Judgment!Vinodkumar Ratilal Shah Vs. Madhubala Madhav Kharait (Smt.)
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-29-1988
Reported in: 1988(2)BomCR99
G.H. Guttal, J.1. These petitions by the judgement-debtor under Article 227 of the Constitution of India raise the question of executability of the decree for eviction of a tenant made under the Bombay Rent Act. The question arises in the following manner.The respondent-judgment creditor is the owner of a building in Pune. The building faces North-South and consists of ground and first floor with a loft over the first floor. On the ground floor there are two rooms. The entrance on the ground floor leads into the front room in the occupation of the petitioner-judgement debtor. The rear door of the front room opens into a passage Beyond the passage is situated the second room-rear room-which is also in the occupation of the judgement debtor. In this passage there is a stair case leading to the first floor. One can reach the first floor by using the stair case and the loft by using the room on the first floor. The passage in which the stair case is situated is closed at both the ends. Con...
Tag this Judgment!Premchand Chowgwal JaIn and Two Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-26-1988
Reported in: (1988)(39)ELT312Tri(Mum.)bai
1.The three appeals filled before the Gold Control Administrator against the common order-in-original bearing No. XVII(GC)8- 12/87/478 dated 18-1-1982 passed by the Collector of Customs (P), Bombay statutoriy stood transferred to the Tribunal.2 . As these Appeals involve common questions of law and facts, they are clubbed together, heard together, hence this common order.3. The appellant in appeal GC(T)(BOM) No. 36/82 is a partnership firm.The appellant in A. No. 34/82 is the son of appellant in Appeal No.35/82. The father and the son are the partners of the firm referred to above.4. The facts necessary for the disposal of these appeals are few and single. On 12-3-1981, the Gold Control Supdt. visited the premises of M/s. Chhogmal Rupchand Jain. During the visit, he came to know that Shri Chhogmal R. Jain In 1972 and inducted his son Premchand Chhogmal Jain as partner. Ever since the year 1972, the partnership firm has been carrying on the business as gold dealers. But then, no licenc...
Tag this Judgment!A.A. Fernandes Vs. Modern Mills Ltd. and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-26-1988
Reported in: [1989(59)FLR470]; (1990)ILLJ538Bom
1. By this petition, the petitioner-employee seeks to challenge the order dated April 1, 1986 passed by the Industrial Court dismissing his appeal and allowing the appeal filed by the respondent-employer.2. The petitioner was employed with the 1st respondent Modern Mills Limited as a clerk in 1943 and he continued to serve in that capacity for about 38 years, till he was dismissed from service on August 9, 1981. The incident leading to his dismissal was as follows :Sometime in the second week of January, 1981 the petitioner was told orally by the Administrative Officer to go and work in the Records Section from the Sizing Section or C.D.S. Section, where he was working for about two years till that time. The petitioner, however, demanded his order of transfer in writing and did not resume his duties in the Records Section but continued to work in the C.D.S. Section. Thereafter on February 6, 1981 the Administrative Officer gave him a letter stating as follows :'You have been asked by t...
Tag this Judgment!Alex Fernandes of Bombay Vs. (Smt) N.A. Kadam and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-26-1988
Reported in: (1988)IILLJ287Bom
1. By this writ petition under Article 226 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-workman challenges the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Maharashtra State, Thane, in reference (IT) No. 45 of 1978, on 31st January, 1983.2. The petitioner was employed by the second respondent-company, Billion Plastics Private Limited, having their office at the 9th floor, Tulsiani Chambers, Nariman Point, Bombay-400 021, as a draughtsman since the year 1966 on a monthly salary of Rs. 125/-. In 1967, he was taken up as a member of the staff and was designated as supervisor-cum-operator which reduced his salary to Rs. 100/- per month. According to him, he was the seniormost workman in the category of the supervisor-cum-operator. He contended that he was ill from 15th September, 1974 to 15th December, 1975 and was, therefore, absent from duties. He was, however, sending medical certificates by hand delivery. And he resumed his duties, after his illness from 19th December...
Tag this Judgment!C.A. Pendurkar and Co. Vs. Collector of Customs (Prev.)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-25-1988
Reported in: (1988)(38)ELT689Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appeal filed before the Gold Control Administrator against the Order-in-Original bearing No. XVII(GC)8-23/81/2641 dated 26th May, 1982 passed by the Collector of Customs (Prev.), Bombay statutorily stood transferred to the Tribunal. On 15-5-1981 the officers of Gold Control, Bombay, after verification of the statutory records and the physical stock found 1298 gms. of 22 and 23 carats purity and 145 gms. of 12 14 cts. purity new gold ornaments in excess. As the partner of the firm Shri Chandrakumar could not satisfactorily explain the excess, both the quantities were seized. On the date of seizure the statement of Chandrakumar who appears to be the person in charge of the management of the firm, admitted the seizure. He, however, stated that since his mother who was the other partner, was suffering from cancer he too was not attend -ing to the business and one servant Kashinat was looking after the business. He further admitted that the servant had not been giving vouchers while...
Tag this Judgment!Bank of India Vs. Laffans India Exports Private Ltd. and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-25-1988
Reported in: 1994(1)BomCR419
Sujata Manohar, J.1. The appellant-Bank is the original plaintiff while respondents 1 and 2 are the original defendants 1 and 2. On or about 10th July, 1974 Mellon Bank International, New York, opened an irrevocable letter of credit for U.S. $1,63,755.00 equivalent to Rs.12,77,496 at the instance of Messrs Loosin International, New York in favour of Messrs Mixmum Export Import Pvt. Ltd. The letter of credit was in respect of readymade garments to be shipped by M/s. Mixmum Export Import Pvt. Ltd. to New York on or before 5th September, 1974. Under the letter of credit drafts had to be drawn by the beneficiary 'at 90 days sight' on Mellon Bank International. The appellant-Bank as advisory bank informed M/s. Nirman Export Import Pvt. Ltd. about the opening of this letter of credit.2. In or about July, 1974 a part of the credit under this letter of credit amounting to U.S. $42,600 (Rs.3,31,517.50) was transferred to Laffans India Exports Pvt. Ltd., the 1st respondent herein.3. Under this l...
Tag this Judgment!Sinnar Bidi Udyog Limited Vs. Shri Keru Murlidhar Varhade and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-24-1988
Reported in: (1995)IIILLJ586Bom
H.H. Kantharia, J. 1. The petitioner company manufactures beedies and employed about 65 workmen. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 were employed by them as Bidi Rollers in the year 1973. Their wages were fixed at Rs. 5/- per thousand bidies. According to Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 (hereinafter referred to as 'the workmen') they were the active members of a union called 'Sangamner, Akola, Sinnar Taluka Bidi Kamagar Samiti', and that the company started deducting 10 Ps. per week from the meagre wages of the employees of the company under the pretext that the management was collecting the said amount towards the labour welfare fund and Re. 1/- per week in the name of building fund as also Rs. 5/-per month towards smafi savings and another sum of Rs. 5/- per month towards the group insurance scheme. There were no receipts passed by the Company for the recovery of these amounts and on account of that there was discontent among the employees of the company and hence the present two workmen as leaders of ...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Customs (P) Vs. Jagdishchandra Laxidas Sharma
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-23-1988
Reported in: (1988)(37)ELT358Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This Reference application under Section 130(1) of the Customs Act is by the Collector of Customs (P), Ahmedabad. This arises out of the common order dated 17-10-1986 passed by this Bench in the two appeals CD(T)(BOM)467/81 and 489/81. By this application, the Collector requires the Tribunal to refer to the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat the following 4 points, which according to the Collector are points of law arising out of the order referred to above : (1) Whether the interpretation of Section 115(2) of the Hon'ble Tribunal is correct in law in view of the specific definition of the term "Smuggling"; (2) It is on record that Shri J.L. Sharma, the owner of the truck had consented to give his truck to Mr. Karim, a person of questionable antecedents. This is evident from the statements given by the driver of the truck. His involvement is, therefore established; (3) Whether Customs department has proved that the Wadi from where the said silver ingots were dug out was in possession an...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »