Mumbai Court June 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.
Sharad Mukunda Patil and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-14-1989
Reported in: 1990(1)BomCR286; (1989)91BOMLR429
M.S. Deshpande, J.1. These 9 petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution are directed against the acquisition by the respondents of the several lands owned by the petitioners under the provisions of sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act and they may conveniently by taken up for decision together.2. In Writ Petition No. 1006 to 1009 a notification dated 11-3-1977 under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act came to be published on 17-7-1977. The notification under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 30-11-1979, but earlier a declaration under section 11 of the Maharashtra Resettlement of Project Displaced Persons Act, 1976 ('Resettlement Act' for short) came to be made on 14-2-1978. In Writ Petition No. 1677, 1836, 1860 and 1877 of 1980 the notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act which was dated 19-5-1977 was published on 30-6-1977 while declaration under section 11 of the Resettlement Act was issued on 24-11-1978 and the notification under sec...
Godfrey Phillips India Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-13-1989
Reported in: 1990(26)ECC280; 1989(25)LC239(Bombay); 1989(43)ELT260(Bom)
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. The petitioners manufacture cigarettes. Until 30th November 1982 a Notification (No. 30/79-CE) prescribed a concessional rate of duty on cigarettes. By a Notification dated 30th November 1982 the earlier Notification was rescinded so that excise duty on cigarettes became payable at the tariff rate. On 3rd December 1982 the Superintendent, Central Excise, informed the petitioners of the above and requested them to submit a new price list failing approval of which clearances would not be allowed. On 6th December, 1982 the petitioners informed the Assistant Collector that they required some time to consider the text of the latter notification. On 14th December 1982 the petitioners wrote to the Assistant Collector that the wholesale prices and assessable values of all their brands of cigarettes had been retained and the assessable values approved earlier would hold goods; only the amount of duty payable would be affected. A price list upon that basis was forwarded. On 1...
Dawn Apparels Limited Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-13-1989
Reported in: 1989(23)LC505(Bombay); 1989(43)ELT401(Bom)
1. This writ petition concerns the application of Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, as it stood prior to the amendment which came into force on 1st October, 1975.2. The petitioners are a subsidiary company of M/s. Dawn Mills Co. Ltd. They manufacture items of apparel, including brassieres, the manufacture of which they commenced in 1972. They entered into an arrangement with Dawn Mills whereunder the latter agreed to buy the entire production of brassieres manufactured by the petitioners at an ex-factory rate based on the petitioners manufacturing cost and manufacturing profits. The marketing and sales efforts in respect of these bras were put in by Dawn Mills and the prices at which they were sold were also fixed by Dawn Mills.3. On 20th July 1974 the petitioners received a notice from the Superintendent of Central Excise, Bombay, under the provisions of the old Section 4. The notice stated that it was seen from the invoices that the petitioners' entire production o...
Maroti Vs. Kusum
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-13-1989
Reported in: I(1990)DMC211
B.G. Deo, J.1. The Trial Court in Misc. Case No. 6/83 granted Rs. 75/- as maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code to the non-applicant here Kusum. In revision the learned Sessions Judge enhanced the amount to Rs. 200/- per month. So far as the liability to grant maintenance is concerned there is no doubt about it, since the husband has kept a mistress from whom he has a son. He cannot, therefore, compel the wife Kusum to come back home. She has a right to reside separately and claim maintenance. So far as quantum is concerned the enhancement has been granted by the Additional Session Judge, on the ground that the husband is an agriculturist having five to six hectares of land and is also doing some business of milk. Taking into consideration the status of the patties and also taking into consideration the fact that the wife is admittedly earning Rs. 3 to 4 as labourer the revisional Court bar granted Rs. 200/- per month, as maintenance from the date of the applicat...
Kisan Bhagwan Gawali and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-12-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Bom343; 1990(2)BomCR63
ORDERV. A. Mohta, J.1. Is a total ban on grant of licence required for grazing cattle in Government forest units permitted for grazing to 'Kathewadi' graziers Constitutional? In our view the answer to the above question has to be in the negative.2. First the small factual background against which the question falls for consideration. The petitioners are graziers owning herds of cow and calves from Kathewad region in the Gujarat State. They move all over India in search of fodder for their cattle,specially because of the conditions of famine prevailing in that area. They survive on sale of milk and manure from the cattle. They also settle down at fixed places preferably where cattle can be fed easily. Such graziers were granted grazing licences for some period earlier, but the respondents -- State of Maharashtra and its Forest Officers -- Off late took a policy decision not to grant such licences to any Kathewadi grazier and totally excluded that class from for consideration for grant o...
Jitsingh Kalirai, Asstt. Collr. of C. Ex. Vs. Kulbir Singh Ahuja
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-09-1989
Reported in: 1989(43)ELT3(Bom)
1. Respondent No. 1 is accused No. 19 in a case filed by the Collector of Central Excise being Criminal Case No. 132/CW/1986 in the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Esplanade, Bombay, and which is now pending in the 3rd Court of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Esplanade, Bombay, bearing Criminal Case No. 38/CW/1989. The case is essentially against M/s. Voltas Ltd. and 27 others. Respondent No. 1 was the Commercial Manager and he was one of the main accused in the case. It is an admitted position that the other accused are the members of the Board of Voltas Ltd. and other office-bearers of the said company. The case is on the allegation that the accused have evaded excise to the tune of Rs. 6,32,86,400/- and that thereby they have defrauded the Central Excise of the legitimate excise duty. The case is pending since about 1986 and according Mr. Samant the case might be taken up for hearing any moment. On the other hand, according to Mr. Bhat (who is appearing for...
Tata Exports Limited Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-09-1989
Reported in: 1990(26)ECC277; 1989(25)LC93(Bombay); 1989(43)ELT245(Bom)
1. This petition concerns the classification of Dextrose Anhydrous. Forty M.Ts. thereof were imported by the petitioners. According to the petitioners, the said goods are an organic compound classifiable under Chapter 29.01/45 of Customs Tariff Act and Customs duty at the rate of 60% is payable thereon. According to the respondents, they are classifiable under Chapter 17.02 as a sugar in solid form liable to duty at the rate of 100%.2. The petitioners through their advocates wrote to the respondents on 6th December 1982 asking that the said goods be classified under Chapter 29.01/45 as an organic chemical. The said goods arrived in Bombay on 17th December, 1982 and the petitioners through their advocates wrote to the respondents reiterating the said contention. They also requested that no countervailing duty should be charged in respect of the said goods in view of Excise Exemption Notification No. 104/82. On 21st December 1982 this writ petition was filed. On 29th December 1982 the pe...
Petron Engineering Construction (Pvt.) Ltd. and Another Vs. Income-tax ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-08-1989
Reported in: [1990]185ITR81(Bom)
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. We are concerned here with the assessment year 1978-79. The assessment of the petitioners for that assessment year was completed on September 19, 1981. The appeal filed therefrom was decided on December 7, 1981. Notice purporting to reopen the assessment under section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was issued to the petitioners on October 11, 1982. The petitioners' chartered accountants sought the reasons for the initiation of these reassessment proceedings. The Income-tax Officer declined to furnish the same and this was recorded by the chartered accountants on November 24, 1982. This writ petition impugns the notice.2. There is no affidavit-in-reply. Dr. Balasubramaniam, learned counsel for the Revenue, said that 'it seems' that the reassessment proceedings were initiated because of a judgment of this court. Asked if he stated that on the basis of the records of the Income-tax Department, he stated that he made the submission on the basis of a sheet of paper ...
Haribhau Mahadeo Rewale Vs. Gayabai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-07-1989
Reported in: I(1990)DMC516
B.G. Deo, J.1. A divorcee has been granted maintenance of Rs. 100/-per month to be paid by the divorced husband by the impugned order dated 12-8-1988 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Akola in Criminal Revision Application No. 150 of 1987. The divorcee is entitled for getting maintenance and no interference in the order on that ground is called for. So far as the question of quantum is concerned, Rs. 100/- per month is the amount which is just sufficient to keep the body and soul together and having regard to the landed property of the applicant and his alleged milk business, I find that the order is just and proper and does not call for any interference at all in this revision application. 2. In the result, the revision application is dismissed. ...
Ebrahim Fakir Ansari Vs. Sitaram Kamalaksha Kamat and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-07-1989
Reported in: 1990ACJ465
T.D. Sugla, J.1. The appellant herein is the original applicant. In a motor accident which took place on 29th August, 1984, the applicant sustained injuries. He was hit on his left leg and sustained serious injuries. He had to be operated twice and was under plaster for about a year. He had to be on leave for 8 months and 7 days. Dr. H.R. Jhunjhunwala, whose certificate dated 25th March, 1986 was obtained and produced, estimated his permanent disability at about 30 per cent.2. The learned Member found the driver of the vehicle to be negligent and accordingly liable to pay compensation to the applicant. However, as against the claim of the applicant for Rs. 1,00,000/-, the learned Member allowed the claim to the extent of Rs. 60,504/-. Being not satisfied with the amount of compensation, the applicant has come in appeal.3. The amount of compensation was computed by the learned Member under six heads though they actually would constitute five heads. Rs. 20,000/- and Rs. 5,000/- were awar...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »