Mumbai Court December 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.
Shriram Govind Matapurkar Vs. V.S. Jain
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-05-1989
Reported in: 1990(2)BomCR219
T.D. Sugla, J.1. By judgment and order dated April, 21, 1989 rule on this application was made absolute and six months' time to vacate the suit premises was granted on the application of Shri Mandlik, the learned Counsel for the respondent-opponent subject to the opponent giving an undertaking in writing to the competent authority.2. The opponent filed appeal before the Supreme Court being Civil Appeal No. 2858 of 1989 arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No. 7564 of 1989. Observing that the matter was covered by it earlier decision, the appeal was allowed by a short judgment dated June 19, 1989 reading as :'Heard Counsel, Special leave is granted. The matter in my opinion, is covered by the decision of this Court in Shivram Anand Shiroor v. Radhabai Shantaram Kowshik & another : [1984]2SCR750 . It is, therefore, not necessary to keep the matter pending any longer. I allow the appeal. In reversal of the order of the High Court dated 3-5-1989 (sic) the matter stands remitted to the High Court ...
Smt. Lucy R. D'Souza and etc. etc. Vs. State of Goa and others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Bom355
ORDERV. A. Mohta, J.1. Section 53(1)(vii) of the Goa, Daman and Diu Public Health Act, 1985 (the Act) empowers the State Government to isolate persons found to be positive for Acquired Immuno Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS), for such period and on such conditions as may be considered necessary and in such Institutions or wards thereof as may be prescribed. A common point raised in these three petitions is whether the said provision is unreasonable, and therefore, violative of rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(d) and 21 of the Constitution of India.2. The Act aims at advancing the public health. Section 2(15) defines the term 'infectious disease' as meaning an infactiousdisease as defined in Section 47 and includes notified diseases as defined in Section 57. Chapter VII relates to prevention, notification and treatment of diseases. Section 47 enumerates the list of infectious diseases and empowers the Government to declare by notification certain diseases to be infectious. Section 49 relates t...
Hemant Vyankatesh Agwan Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-1989
Reported in: 1990(1)BomCR433
M.S. Deshpande, J.1. This is an appeal by the accused who was convicted under section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years.2. The incident on the basis of which the appellant came to be tried occurred on June 4, 1989. At about 4.10 p.m. P.S.I. Khodke of Ambazari Police Station of Nagpur, received information that the appellant was in possession of brown sugar and used to sell on plot No. 269, Abhyankar Nagar, Nagpur. After receiving this information, he called two panchas and told them and Shri Thakre. Assistant Commissioner of Police, Sitabuldi Zone and proceeded to the spot where he found the appellant. After offering their search to him, the appellant was searched and was found to be in possession of 65 small packets covered with plastic bag in the left pocket of his full-pant and an amount of Rs. 30/...
Marotirao Bhaurao and ors. Vs. Kashinath Singh Gangusingh Raut
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-1989
Reported in: (1989)91BOMLR743
V.V. Kamat, J.1. These three revision applications are preferred by three tenants of the same landlord under the provisions of Section 26 of the Hyderabad Houses (Rent, Eviction and Lease) Control Act, 1954 challenging their eviction from the respective suit premises in their possession as tenants.2. The one question which is involved in these three petitions is common to all the three petitions, but the third Petition, namely Civil Revision application No. 627/89 raises for itself only, one more question about the willful default on the part of the tenant in payment of rent. The first question will be taken up for consideration and consequent decision, in the first instance, and would naturally dispose all the three applications as regards the said question and the remaining part of the Judgment with regard to the question of willful default would dispose of the last of the revision application being Civil revision application 627/89.3. The fact necessary for the purpose of considerat...
Mukund Iron and Steel Works Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-01-1989
Reported in: (1990)(48)ELT552Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal directed against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay bearing No. R-642/BII-249/88 (File No.V-2 (CH. 72) 1012/88) dated 24-11-1988 rejecting the appellants' appeal for availment of MODVAT benefit in respect of certain inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture of iron and steel castings.3. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of iron and steel articles. They applied for availment of the MODVATbenefit of the following inputs, namely Acetylene gas, flourspar, binders (foundry chemicals), sleeves, graphite stopper head, fireclay, ramming mass and refractories. The department objected to the availment of MODVAT benefit in respect of the aforesaid duty paid inputs on the ground that they are not admissible under the relevant rules in MODVAT scheme. In the adjudication proceedings initiated by the Assistant Collector, it was held that these inputs are not eligible for availment of MODVAT credit and confirmed the demands raised un...
Mukand Iron and Steel Works Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-01-1989
Reported in: (1990)(30)LC252Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal directed against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay bearing No. R-642/BII-249/88 (File No.V-2(CH. 72) 1012/88) dated 24,11.1988 rejecting the appellants appeal for availment of MODVAT benefit in respect of certain inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture of iron and steel castings.3. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of iron and steel articles. They applied for availment of the MODVAT benefit of the following inputs, namely Acetylene gas, flourspar, binders (foundry chemicals), sleeves, graphite stopper head, fireclay, ramming mass and refractories. The department objected to the availment of MODVAT benefit in respect of the aforesaid duty-paid inputs on the ground that they are not admissible under the relevant rules in MODVAT scheme. In the adjudication proceedings initiated by the Assistant Collector, it was held that these inputs are not eligible for availment of MODVAT credit and confirmed the demands raised und...
Gafur Bandu Mulla and ors. Vs. Khutubbi Mard Kondiba Mulla and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-01-1989
Reported in: 1990(2)BomCR478; (1989)91BOMLR934
M.L. Dudhat, J.1. This second appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dated 22nd June, 1979, passed by the Extra Assistant Judge, Satara, dismissing Civil Appeal No. 43 of 1977 and confirming the judgment and order dated 20th November, 1976, passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Karad, dismissing Regular Civil Suit No. 182 of 1971 with costs to defendant Nos. 1 to 4, 6, 7, 9, 10 and 13. The appellants-original plaintiffs filed the aforesaid suit against the respondents defendants for partition and separate possession of the 1/3rd share in the suit property. It was the case of the plaintiffs that Bandu-husband of plaintiff No. 2 and father of plaintiff Nos. 1 and 3 had three brothers viz. Kondi, Gulab and one more brother who died without leaving behind him any heirs. It was further the case of plaintiffs Nos. 1 and 3 that their father had 1/3rd share in the ancestral joint Muslim family properties. It was further their case that defendant Nos. 1 to 17 are the hei...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›