Mumbai Court September 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.
indrakumar Faredun Irani and Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ot ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-09-1988
Reported in: 1989(1)BomCR601; 1989MhLJ313
ORDER1. These 23 applications involve similar questions of law and fact and they have been heard together and this judgment disposes of all those cases.2. The facts giving rise to these criminal applications are that a large number of cars registered with Delhi Regional Transport Office were stolen during the period from 1981 to 1983 and the owners of those cars lodged reports about the thefts of their cars at the local police-stations having jurisdiction at Delhi. In some of the first information reports the engine numbers and the chassis numbers of the cars were given and of some of the cars the engine numbers and the chassis numbers were found during investigation. The local police station could not succeed in recovering those cars and, therefore, in 1983 the matter was entrusted to the Anti-Auto Theft Squad at Delhi. The police-officers working in that Squad in February 1983 got clue that some of those cars were brought to Bombay and they were disposed of at Bombay under fake regis...
Ratanbai Hiralal Gandhi Vs. Collector of C. Ex. and Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-08-1988
Reported in: (1989)(21)LC237Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Both these appeals arise out of and are directed against the order-in-original bearing No. F. No. XVII (GC) 8-36/Adj/81/828 dated 7-3-1983 passed by the Collector of Central Excise & Customs, Pune.2. As these appeals involve common questions of law and facts they were clubbed together, heard together, hence this common order.3. The subject of challenge in these appeals is the order of confiscation of primary gold weighing 197.100 gms. in the form of rava, foils patyas and wires and absolute confiscation of 15 gold coins weighing 29.200 gms. and also the confiscation of gold ornaments weighing 1409.600 gms. and the fine of Rs. 20,000/- levied in lieu of confiscation as well as the penalty of Rs. 5,000/- on the appellant in appeal No. 73/83 and Rs. 1000/- on the appellant in appeal No. 72/83.4. The appellant in appeal No. 73/83 is the son of the appellant in appeal No. 72/83. They alongwith the wife in appeal No. 73/83 were living together at the relevant time.5. On 29-3-81, the ...
Indian Pilots Guild and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-08-1988
Reported in: (1995)IIILLJ784Bom
Ashok Agarwal, J.1. The Pilots of Air India have come up with a grievance that Air India has introduced direct non-stopping flights to London and in the process by issue of a unilateral order has increased their flight-time and flight-duty-time. This has violated the settlement arrived at on 22nd September, 1971. That settlement was reiterated in the settlements of 2nd April 1982 and 20th November, 1984. The unilateral action on the part of the Air India of increasing the flight-time and the flight-duty-time of the Pilots is an affront to the valuable rights of the Pilots under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the I.D. Act) as also under the aforesaid settlements 1971, 1982 and 1984. The impugned order has been motivated solely for the purpose of profit-making. It has ignored the safety measures in regard to the crew and the passengers and hence is liable to be struck down.2. The Indian Pilots Guild, representing the Pilots of Air India, has averred that af...
Gitanjali Gajanan Tendulkar Vs. Gajanan Dinkar Tendulkar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-08-1988
Reported in: 1989(1)BomCR334; I(1990)DMC59; 1989MhLJ371
H. Suresh, J.1. In a matrimonial petition filed by the wife as against the husband on the ground of desertion and cruelty the wife took out a notice of motion for interim maintenance and for costs. The learned Judge dismissed the said notice of motion on the ground that for 19 years she had stayed away from her husband and that she did not ask for maintenance and that, therefore, she should not get any order of maintenance.2. Prima facie, this line of reasoning is untenable in law. There are circumstances and circumstances which have to be taken into consideration particularly when the wife has to stay away from her husband. In her petition, she has made various allegations as to why she could not stay with her husband. When she left her husband, she was pregnant and thereafter she delivered a son who is now about 19 years old. For 19 years the husband did not pay a single pie to the wife or to the son. I am told that her son is studying in a college and she is meeting all the expenses...
Shantilal U. Siroya Vs. Collector of Customs (Prev.)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1988
Reported in: (1989)(24)LC198Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal arises out of and is directed against Order-in-Original bearing F.No. XVII(GC)8-19/81/396, dated 3-2-1983 passed by the Collector of Customs (Preventive), Bombay. The subject of challenge of this appeal is the order of confiscation of 936.150 gms. of gold and the fine of Rs. 25,000/levied in lieu of confiscation as well as the penalty of Rs. 2,500/- imposed on the appellant.2. During the hearing of this appeal, Shri Wazifdar made the following submissions. Firstly, he urged that the Department's case that the appellant was intercepted ear Stock Exchange Building with the seized gold and account books and thereafter he was brought to the Gold Control Office is totally false. Elaborating his contentions, Shri Wazifdar referred to the statement of the appellant recorded immediately after the seizure. In the statement, among other things, the appellant has stated :- "Today on 28-4-81 you and your officers came to my shop and held me and brought me to the office and in the p...
Miss Lata Mangeshkar Vs. First Wealth-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1988
Reported in: (1990)32ITD68(Mum.)
1. The assessee, a resident individual, and the Revenue are in appeals involving assessment years 1982-83,1983-84 and 1984-85 for which the respective valuation dates are 31-3-1982, 31-3-1983 and 31-3-1984.Since these are cross-appeals arising out of the common order of the learned Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals), Central-II, Bombay, at our level also, these are being decided by this common order. (i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, whether annuity policies are/constitute, taxable wealth of the assessee and if so what should be the valuation thereof; and (ii) Royalty in the hands of the assessee is taxable asset/wealth or not and if sovaluation thereof - what should be.2. Parties have been heard at length on two dates viz., 10-8-1988 and 25-8-1988. Orders of the learned lower authorities have been duly noted. The assessee has placed on our file photostat copy of a 'Policy' issued by the Life Insurance Corporation of India as also assessee's Advocate's letter da...
Chandragupta Gupta Vs. Padmanabha Subramani (Administrative Manager, G ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1988
Reported in: [1989]65CompCas190(Bom)
Tated, J.1. The petitioner-accused preferred this petition under section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, for quashing the proceedings in Criminal Case No 108/S of 1982, pending before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 9th Court, at Bandra, Bombay, for the offence punishable under section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956, or in the alternative, for staying the proceedings of the said criminal case till the dispute raised by him under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and which has been referred by the State to the First Labour Court is decided.2. The facts giving rise to the present petition, briefly stated, are that they petitioner-accused was appointed and was working as an Industrial Relations Executive with Glaxo Laboratories (India) Ltd (now Glindia Ltd), a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913. The petitioners joined the services of the said company in 1977. As the petitioner had no accommodation, the company, on July 2, 1977, allotted te...
R.P. Kapoor and ors. Vs. the Charity Commissioner, Maharashtra State a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Bom274; 1988(3)BomCR546; (1989)91BOMLR529
1. Shri Janardhan for the respondents (original plaintiffs) raised a preliminary objection. According to him the appeal as filed is incompetent. It is therefore, proposed to consider the preliminary objection first. It is stated that a complain/application was filed in this case before the Joint Charity Commissioner who by his order dt. 27th July, 1982 passed under s. 50A. Bombay Public Trusts Act , 1950 finally disposed the complaint/application. Appeal filed against that order by the appellants (original defendants) was also disposed of by the Appellate Court vide order and judgment dt. 13th June 1983 finally. In the above view of the matter appeal under S. 100 Civil P.C. and not an appeal from order under s. 104 of the Code against the judgment and decree of the appellate Court would be competent. The learned counsel for the appellant fairly conceded that strictly speaking her client should have filed appeal under S. 100, C.P. C, and not an appeal under S. 104, C.P.C treating the ap...
Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. S.J. Engineering Works and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1988
Reported in: 1989(21)LC291(Bombay)
Sawant, J.1. This appeal seeks to challenge the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge on June 17, 1988 in Writ Petition No. 1735 of 1988. The learned Judge has allowed the petitioners to clear the goods by giving Bank Guarantee in favour of the Collector of Customs, for the differential amount of the additional duty.2. Mr. Dalai appearing for the appellant-Union of India-contends that the challenge to Section 3(2) of the Customs Act on grounds other than the legislative competence has already been repelled by this Court and hence the present challenge based on legislative competence of the Parliament does not merit the impugned interim order in favour of the petitioners.3. Mr. Bulchandani appearing for the respondents-petitioners points out that the constitutional validity of Section 3(2) of the Customs Act, including the legislative competence of the Parliament to enact the said provision is directly under challenge in the Supreme Court right from the year 1983. In all matt...
Ramanlal Narsimhadas Desai Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-1988
Reported in: (1989)(19)ECC134
1. This appeal arises out of and is directed against the order-in-appeal bearing No. S/49-57 to 60/82-GC dated 15/1/1983 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay.2. The subject of challenge is restricted to the order of absolute confiscation of 81.900 gms of primary gold which was seized from the possession of the appellant Shri Ramanlal N. Desai.3. Appearing for the appellant Shri Shah contended that the appellant had admitted the possession of the primary gold but had stated that it was obtained by melting the old gold ornaments. The other quantity of primary gold weighing 82.000 gms seized from his premises belonged to Shri Gulab Chandulal Vagadia. Shri Shah submitted that the only allegation in the show cause notice against the appellant was for possessing primary gold and there was no other charge. Similarly the finding of the Collector against the appellant Is also the contravention of the provisions of Section. 8(1) read with Section.8(6), whereas the allegations ag...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »