Mumbai Court August 1988 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.
Arjun Nagu Sokate and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-26-1988
Reported in: 1988(4)BomCR379
H.D. Patel, J.1. Upon each of the appellants being convicted for the offence punishable under section 147 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year ; for the offence punishable under section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years; for offence under section 302 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life; for offence punishable punishable under section 307 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- each, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month; for offence under section 323 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months, by judgment dated 9th December, 1985 in Sessions Case No. 43 of 1985 d...
Mrs. S.V. Limaye Vs. Fourth Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-1988
Reported in: (1989)29ITD258(Mum.)
2. The assessee's husband owned a flat in Bombay. As a wife, the assessee used to reside with her husband in said flat. Said flat was the permanent dwelling place of the assessee and her husband.3. The assessee's husband was required to stay in Japan during the relevant accounting year in connection with his employment. The assessee's husband, accordingly, went to Japan and stayed there. The assessee subsequently joined her husband in Japan and began to reside with him. The flat at Bombay which was permanent residence of the couple was locked during their stay in Japan. When the couple returned to India, they again resided in said flat.4. We are not concerned with the assessment of assessee's husband. He was in India for less than thirty days in the relevant year and as such, on that ground alone Section 6(1)(b) was not attracted in his case and he was clearly a non-resident. As far as the assessee is concerned, she was in India from 1-4-1977 to 11-5-1977 for 41 days in the relevant a...
Zilla Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit and Another Vs. General Assuranc ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-1988
Reported in: [1990]69CompCas671(Bom)
Agarwal, J.1. Taking exception to the dismissal of their suit, the original plaintiffs have preferred the present appeal.2. Plaintiff No. 1 is a co-operative bank carrying on the business, inter alia, of advancing moneys on pledge of agricultural produce/processed goods, etc. Plaintiff NO. 2 is a co-operative society which, inter alia, advances loans to its members, the farmers producing cotton. It also advances loan to traders on pledge of the agricultural produce of pressed cotton bales. The defendants are insurers carrying on the business of general insurance.3. The events that led to the filing of the present suit occurred at Anjad, a hamlet in Madhya Pradesh situate some eighty miles from Indore. This village is situate in the vicinity of a cotton producing area. It is a market place for auction sales of ginned and pressed cotton bales. The process of ginning and pressing cotton used to be carried on at Maganalal Nathulal jain Ginning and Pressing Factory at the said village Anjad...
Nilkanth S/O Rajaram Gotmare Vs. Vice Chancellor, Nagpur University an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-1988
Reported in: 1989(2)BomCR394
H.W. Dhabe, J.Parties by Counsel. Rule. Heard forthwith.1. Since this was an urgent matter, we heard the learned Counsel for the parties in this writ petition at length. We have, therefore, issued rule to be heard forthwith.2. This writ petition presents rather an unique problem which exposes the inadequacy of the University Rules in relation to the election to one of its bodies viz. the Board of Studies. Section 29 of Nagpur University Act, 1974 (for short, ' the University Act') provides for composition of Board of Studies. Section 29(1) provides that there shall be a Board of Studies for every subject or group of subjects as prescribed by the statutes. Section 29(2) provides for the composition of the said Board of Studies. Clause (ii) of section 29(2) which is relevant for the purpose of this petition provides that the Board shall consist of not more that ten Heads of Departments in Colleges and recognised institutions teaching the subjects at the special, principal or major level,...
Gautamchand V. Solanki Vs. Administrator, Gold Control
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-23-1988
Reported in: (1989)(20)LC97Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal arise out of and is directed against the Order-in-Appeal bearing No. S/49-43/83-GC, dated 26-2-1983 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals) Bombay.2. The subject of challenge in this appeal is the order of confiscation of gold and gold ornaments totally weighing 302.000 gms, which were allowed to be released on payment of fine of Rs. 3750/-.3. Shri Solanki, appearing for the appellant, vehemently contended that, at the time of seizure of the above mentioned gold, the description of the articles were not stated in the Panchnama. The gold control officers verified the GS-13 register as well as the physical stock. There was a discrepancy between the two. The physical stock show excess of 302.000 gms and, therefore, those 302.000 gms have been seized. Shri Solanki submitted that unless it is established that there was contravention of the provisions of the Gold (Control) Act in respect of this 302.000 gms the same are not liable to be confiscated.The next submission of...
Chiman Keshvadas Bhatia Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-23-1988
Reported in: 1989(1)BomCR422; 1988MhLJ913
H.H. Kantharia, J.1. The appellant-accused was tried by the Special Judge, Thane in Special Case No. 1 of 1980 for offences punishable under section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and section 5(1)(d) read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and by the impugned judgment and Order dated 31st January, 1981 was convicted for the said offences. He was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 months for an offence punishable under section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and also for 6 months rigorous imprisonment for an offence punishable under section 5(1)(d) read with section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. Dr. Laxman Gogate (P.W. 5) was at the relevant time working as Civil Surgeon at Civil Hospital, Thane. It is the prosecution case that as Civil Surgeon he was also entitled to private practice and one of his duties was to attend to the employees of the Government and the public sector Corporati...
Francis Coutinho S/O Marian Coutinho and ors. Vs. Harilal S/O Kamlasha ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-23-1988
Reported in: II(1989)ACC113; 1989(2)BomCR180
M.M. Qazi, J.1 The appellants have challenged the Award dated 27th July, 1984 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Nagpur, rejecting the claim of the appellants for compensation.2. Deceased Louis Coutinho was the son of the appellants Nos. 1 and 2. There is no dispute that he met with an accident with truck No. MHG 2866 on 26-5-1980 which belongs to Shambehari (respondent No. 2) and died almost instantaneously on the spot. The appellants who are the heirs of the deceased submitted their claim before the Tribunal on 18-12-1980. The written statement was filed by the Insurance Company i.e., the New India Insurance Company Limited, Kingsway, Nagpur (Respondent No. 3) on 12-12-1981. The written statement was also filed by one Gangaprasad who was non-applicant No. 2, the alleged owner, before the Tribunal, on 9-12-1982 contending that he was not the owner of the aforesaid truck and that it was Shambehari who was the owner. The evidence came to be recorded on 8-12-1983 and argumen...
Sangli District Powerloom Owners' Association Ltd. and Ors. Vs. the St ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-22-1988
Reported in: [1989(58)FLR68]; (1995)IIILLJ779Bom
Dharmadhikari, J.1. As all these writ petitions involve common questions of law and fact, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. In writ petitions No. 4149/84, 4147/84, 4150/84, 4144/84 and 4214/84 the notification dated 1st August 1984 issued by the Government of Maharashtra in exercise of powers conferred by Clause (b) of Sub-section (1) of Section 3 read with Sub-section (2 ) of Section 5 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, is challenged on various grounds. One of the contentions raised in the petitions related to the constitution of the Advisory Committee itself. It was contended by the petitioners that the Committee was not properly constituted since the person who was initially a representative of the employees, was subsequently appointed as a Chairman of the Committee, which was contrary to the provisions of Section 9 of the Minimum Wages Act, as he could not be termed as an independent person. Some other contentions were also raised. However, ...
Sadashiv Hari Abhyankar Vs. Sanjeev Manohar Bhagwat and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-22-1988
Reported in: 1988(3)BomCR388; (1988)90BOMLR403
Sharad Manohar, J.1. A gory State of affairs this petition reflects, revealing the scandalizing manner in which persons claiming to be tenants without a title of justification for the same can bring the decree-holder-landlord to his wit's end by instituting innumerable proceedings, most of them illegitimate.The suit of the landlady was of the year 1965. She got the decree in her favour in 1975. Even before and after that decree, on several occasions, this litigation had reached the precincts of this Court; every-time this Court had negatived the plea or pleas of persons claiming to be in possession as tenants, and still the decree-holder is unable to reap the fruits of the decree in the litigation which started as early as in the year 1965.2. It is necessary to state the facts chronologically. The suit premises are two Flats Nos. 7 and 8 in a building originally belonging to one Radhabai Hari Abhyankar. Both these flats were let out to the husband of one Smt. Gajarabai Damodar Mhaisalk...
Manubhai Pragaji Vashi Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Bom296; (1989)91BOMLR13; 1989MhLJ344
Lentin, J.1. In withholding the Grant-in-Aid Scheme to Government recognised non-government law colleges in Maharashtra, they have been discriminated against . Such is the ratio of this judgment.2. Maharashtra has the reputation of being the premier State in India. Education wise it has several faculties, to wit, arts, science, commerce, engineering and medicine. They are given grant-in-aid by Government. 3. In the entire State of Maharashtra, there is only one Government run law college. It is the Government Law College at Bombay.4. Quest for legal education in the State has progressively been on the increase year by year. For that matter, during the academic year 1985-86 the total number of law students in Maharashtra was about 25,700. Government's learned counsel Mr. Saldhana with his habitual fairness, informs us that at present the number of such students would be in the vicinity of 27,000 to 28,000.5. This heavy demand for law education could naturally not be met by the solitary ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »