Mumbai Court January 1989 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.
Union of India (Uoi), Through the Superintendent of Post Offices Vs. M ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-13-1989
Reported in: 1990(2)BomCR162
H.D. Patel, J.1. The petitioner union of India, through the Superintendent of Post Offices, Wardha, challenges by this petition only a part of the award dated 27-6-1988 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur, in Case No. CGIT/LC(R)(92) of 1986 to the extent of the relief of reinstatement awarded to the respondent workman.2. The undisputed facts in the case as under :The respondent was employed as a Driver with effect from 5th February, 1982. He was engaged to drive the staff jeep which came to be allotted for the first time by the Government and the said vehicle was kept in the administrative control of the Superintendent of Post Officers. The said employment was on daily wages in minimum pay scale of Rs. 250-400. The services of the respondent were terminated with effect from 13th February, 1985 without giving any notice or pay in lieu of the notice. No retrenchment compensation was also paid to the respondent. Upon termination of the employmen...
Suman Ramchandra Shetye (Smt.) Vs. Ramchandra Sakharam Shetye
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-13-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)BomCR122; (1989)91BOMLR56; I(1990)DMC362
S.M. Daud, J.1. This appeal arises out of a decree for divorce sans alimony passed against the appellant.2. Appellant is the wife and the respondent her husband, married on 8-2-1964. The marriage was an arranged one and the appellant's parents hailed from Kolhapur. The couple have two issues, both sons, Shailesh and Prashant by name. The later was born after 15-8-1975 from which date the couple have not resided together. That an incident involving violence to the person of the husband did take place on 15-8-1975 is not disputed. Thereafter, a number of letter were exchanged between the couple and also written by them to various persons including suppliers of food etc., to the wife and children, the school authorities and the landlord to whom belongs Block No. 1 in the building Vina Vihar at Roshan Nagar, Borivli (West), Bombay-400 092.3. The husband's petition seeking a divorce was initially on the ground of desertion. The version was that the wife has deserted him as from 15-8-1975 an...
Antonio Milagres Fernandes (Dead) through L.R.'s Vs. Pramod Vijayan an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-13-1989
Reported in: 1990ACJ411
G.F. Couto, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 3rd May, 1985, whereby the learned Presiding Officer of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Margao, dismissed an application for compensation filed under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act by the original appellant Antonio Milagres Fernandes.2. The said application was filed pursuant to an accident that occurred on 17th April, 1982 at Navelim and as a result of which the original appellant sustained serious injuries which made him unconscious for a long period of time. The case of the original appellant was that he was standing with his cycle by the roadside at Navelim when a motor cycle driven by the first respondent came to the place with two pillion riders and dashed against the appellant who, as a result, was thrown in a ditch and became unconscious. On the basis of these facts, the original appellant claimed a compensation of Rs. 27,000/-.3. The learned Presiding Officer of the Claims Tribunal after discussi...
Garware Nylons Limited Vs. Collector of Customs and C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-12-1989
Reported in: (1989)(43)ELT307Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal directed against the order of the Collector of Customs (Appeals) bearing No. S/49-556/83-M, dated 26-4-84.2. The brief facts of the case for the purpose of this appeal can be stated as below: The appellants have a bonded warehouse at Pimpri situated in their factory premises. They import raw materials at Bombay Port and transfer the goods under bond to their bonded warehouse at Pimpri, from where the goods are cleared on payment of duty on filing exbond bills of entry. In the case of one such import covering the manifested quantity of 49.275 kgs. of polyamide chips a shortage of 419.500 kgs. was noticed during the survey conducted at Bombay before the removal of the goods to Pimpri. All the same the entire quantity manifested was shown as removed and duty was paid at Pimpri.3. Thereafter a refund claim was filed before the Asstt. Collector (MCD), Bombay Custom House seeking for refund of duty paid on the shortages. This claim has been filed within time. However, a...
Universal Generics (P.) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-12-1989
Reported in: (1989)31ITD369(Mum.)
1. In this appeal the assessee is contesting the action of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in not granting refund of the entire tax paid by it.2. The assessee is a private limited company. The assessment year is 1978-79 and the relevant previous year ended on 30-6-1977.3. As the facts are narrated, it would be seen that the case has a chequered history. The facts in chronological order are as under: (a) During the relevant financial year the assessee had paid advance tax of Rs. 88,080. Further, Rs. 27,887 was the tax deducted at source. In other words, Rs. 1,15,967 was paid by the assessee by way of advance tax/T.D.S. (b) On 27-7-1978 the assessee filed the Return of Income declaring total income of Rs. 1,16,920. The tax payable thereon was Rs. 67,521. (c) On 23-11-1978 the I.T.O., at the instance of the assessee, framed provisional assessment under Section 141A of the Act on a total income of Rs. 1,16,920 as declared by the assessee in its Return. The assessee was accordingl...
Sadanand Sahadeo Rawool Vs. Sulochana Sadanand Rawool
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-12-1989
Reported in: AIR1989Bom220; (1989)91BOMLR118; 1989MhLJ337
1. This appeal impugns the dismissal of a petition seeking a decree of nullity for non-consummation of marriage or in the alternative a divorce on the ground of infidelity.2. The admitted facts are that the parties are Hindus and were married at Bombay on 22 May 1979. In the Diwali of 1979, on the occasion of Bhaubeej Festival, there was some incident leading the husband/ Appellant to snatch her Mangalsutra a from the neck o the wife/Respondent and also to drive her out from the marital home. The intervention of relations and neighbours resulted in reconciliation - but not for long. This is because on 23 January 1980 the appellant petitioned the city Civil Court claiming a decree of nullity on the ground that the marriage had not been consummated owing to the impotence of the Respondent. briefly, the case set out In the petition at that stage was that the Respondent did not have normal genital organs which incapacitated sexual intercourse or that she had so strong and in particular wit...
Madhao S/O Ramchandra Kaduskar Vs. Punjabrao Krishi Vidyapeeth and anr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-12-1989
Reported in: 1990(1)BomCR136
H.W. Dhabe, J.1. These two writ petitions can be conveniently disposed of by this common judgment. We shall first state the facts in Writ Petition No. 1795 of 1982.2. The facts in W.P. No. 1795 of 1982 are that the petitioner therein was appointed as Veterinary Assistant Surgeon in the then State of Madhya Pradesh on 24-6-1954 under the Director of Veterinary Services. His services were transferred w.e.f. 23-7-1954 in the Anatomy Department of the Government Veterinary College, Jabalpur, where he was required to undertake teaching duties as an assistant to the Professor of Anatomy .On reorganisation of State on 1-11-1956, the petitioner was allocated to the then State of Bombay and was transferred to Nagpur on 22-3-1957 as Livestock Inspector under the Deputy Director of Veterinary Services, Nagpur.3. In the State of Bombay, the petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer in Anatomy in the Nagpur Veterinary College on 1-7-1958. He was promoted as Assistant Professor in Anatomy on officiatin...
Daga Enterprises and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-12-1989
Reported in: 1989(1)BomCR467; (1989)91BOMLR840
V.S. Kotwal, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for both the sides.2. Perused the relevant papers.3. 'Dharam Kanta' symbolises the 'scale of justice'. However, the irony is that the producer of the film 'Dharam Kanta' has himself to knock the doors of the Court to get justice. The said film is produced by the second respondent herein who is original complainant and who enjoys a wide reputation in the film world as a renowned Producer and Director of celluloid films and there are several of such highly acclaimed films to his credit. He produced this film in the year 1980-81 with an imposing star-cast and also with an equally imposing grandeur. The first petitioner is a registered partnership firm carrying on the business at Calcutta while the second and third petitioners who are the husband and wife are the partners of the said firm. It is in relation to the said film that certain disputes ultimately obliged the respondent-complainant to file a criminal complaint in the Court of the learned Add...
KamaluddIn Mohd. AmIn Siddique Vs. Asstt. Coll. of Customs
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-12-1989
Reported in: 1989(24)ECC40; 1989(22)LC242(Bombay); 1989(41)ELT185(Bom)
H. Suresh, J.1. This is an application by Accused Nos. 1 and 2 to have the prosecution against them quashed on the ground that in a Customs enquiry they have been let off.2. The brief facts are as follows : On 18th August 1979, the Police Officers of Bhiwandi Police Station accosted the Accused while they were in an Ambassador Car. They were arrested under the Customs Act and a complaint has been filed against them under Section 135(1)(a) and 135(1)(b) punishable under Clause(ii) of Sub-section (1) of Section 135 of the Customs Act. The case has been filed after obtaining a sanction in that behalf on 16th October, 1981. In the meanwhile, in the enquiry proceedings held by the Customs authorities, the Additional Collector of Customs, Bombay, initially imposed a penalty of Rs. 2000/- on each of the Accused. The Accused preferred an Appeal and by an Order dated 11th December, 1981, the Order of imposition of the penalty was set aside and the Appeal was allowed.3. Relying on this Order, th...
Shakti Metal Industries Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-12-1989
Reported in: 1989(22)LC640(Bombay)
S.K. Desai, Ag. C.J.1. In this appeal, the order of the learned single Judge dated 20th April, 1988 stands impugned. As we understand this order the learned single Judge has formed a view that the petitioners' have not paid the countervailing duty on the entire raw material used by the petitioners. In view of the rather loose phraseology employed in the petition particularly in para 9(k), we cannot say that the learned Judge is in any error. Even otherwise it appears from Exhibit 'F' that only certain' information is being sought from the petitioners. We are sure that if the petitioners show and demonstrate that the necessary duty has been paid on the entire raw material used by the petitioners either imported by them or' brought from the market, they will be entitled to the benefit of the exemption notification. If and when any adverse order is passed against them it would be then open to the petitioners to carry the matter in appeal or to impugn those orders by appropriate writ proce...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »