Mumbai Court February 1990 Judgments
Jamnadas Dwarkadas and Co. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-22-1990
Reported in: 1991(35)LC118(Bombay)
M.L. Pendse, J.1. The petitioners are small scale units registered with the Director of Industries, Bombay for the purpose of manufacture of Camphor Tablets. For the manufacture of Camphor Tablets, the petitioners are solely dependent on the supply of raw material in the form of Camphor Powder. The supply of Camphor Powder in the country is inadequate and therefore Camphor Powder is imported through canalising agency, that is, Director of Industries, Bombay. The petitioners applied for grant of licence for import of Camphor Powder and the application was recommended by the Canalising Agency for certain quantity. The Import Policy for the period 1985-88 provided that Camphor Powder is an item which is a canalised one and can be imported only through canalising agency.2. The petitioners' application for import of Camphor Powder in the year 1986 was rejected by the Controller of Imports and Exports on the ground that the case for import cannot be considered on account of indigenous angle....
Tag this Judgment!Awajkha Shabashkha Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-21-1990
Reported in: 1990(2)BomCR51
B.U. Wahane, J.1. The appellant Awajkha Shabashkha has challenged the conviction under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentence for the offence punishable, passed by Shri S.Y. Gambhir, Sessions Judge, Buldana on 19th December, 1986 in Sessions Case No. 84 of 1986. The appellant-accused was found guilty for the murder of Santosh Konduji Padghan, resident of village Mohodari, Tq. Mehkar, District Buldana.2. The facts leading to the filing of this appeal may be briefly stated as follows :Deceased Santosh Konduji Padghan was resident of village Mohodari, Tahsil Mehkar, district Buldana. He was in service of one Sahebrao Suryabhan Lodhe (P.W. 10). One Hamidkha Dagdukha Pathan was also resident of Mohodari. He was the cousin of the appellant-accused and was running a Kirana Shop at Mohodari. The appellant-accused is a resident of village Deolgaon-Mali which is about 2 miles away from Mohodari.3. On 25-11-1985 Jagannath Haribhau Lodhe, resident of Mohodari lodged a report against de...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Ramuben Bhimji and Others Vs. Padmabai and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-20-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Bom85
1. Whether the Agreement of 1st December 1962 created a licence or a lease is a short question that arises for determination in the present Appeal. 2. The learned Judge of the trial Court by his impugned judgment and decree was pleased to hold that the transaction between the parties was one of a lease and the defendants were protected by the provisions of the Bombay Rent Act. Consequently, the suit of the appellants/plaintiffs for possession was dismissed. Being aggrieved by the said decree, the plaintiffs have preferred the present Appeal.3. An Agreement dated 1st December 1962 was entered into between one Bhimji Karson, the husband of the first plaintiff and the father of the plaintiffs Nos. 2 to 5 on the one hand and one Damodar Govind, the husband of the defendant No. 1(a), where-under the latter was granted leave and licence to occupy a portion of a larger plot viz. 18 ft. x 50 ft. in the premises situate on S. V. Road, Goregaon (West), Bombay-400 062. A Copy of the Agreement is ...
Tag this Judgment!Bashir Babumiya Inamdar and Others Vs. Muslim Misgar Jamat and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-20-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Bom326; (1991)93BOMLR905
1. The order passed bythe Extra Joint Judge, Pune on 6th October 1976 in Miscellaneous Application No. 131 of 1973, rejecting the application under Section 70A of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, has been challenged in this appeal.2. Facts giving rise to this litigation may be briefly stated as follows: 3. Surveys Nos. 225A, 225B and 225C (present Surveys Nos. 429A, 429B and 429C), admeasuring about 1 1/2 acres situated at the City of Pune was previously an Inam land. It was given to one Makbulsaheb who happened to be the ancestor of the applicants. This Makbulsaheb was a Mohamed an Saint, After his death, his tomb was constructed on this property. A mosque is also standing on that property. The mosque, however, got damaged in the riots of 1965 but a part of the mosque remains. The ancestors of the applicants were in occupation of the land for a pretty long time, A portion of this land was given on lease to one Abdul Hussain Hasanali Bohori for the period of 99 years on the annual rent of...
Tag this Judgment!Kolhapur Zilla Shetkari Vinkari Sahakari Soot Girani Ltd. Vs. Ramachan ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-20-1990
Reported in: [1991(62)FLR68]; (1992)ILLJ435Bom
1. This Petition is filed by the Kolhapur Zilla Shetkari Vinkari Sahakari Soot Girani Ltd., hereinafter referred to as 'the employer' and in the petition the employer has impugned the order passed in favour of the 1st Respondent employee by the Industrial Court, Kolhapur in Revision Application No. 20 of 1983. In order to understand the controversy a few facts may be stated.2. The employee was in the employment of the petitioner as badli worked. On March 13, 1981, it is claimed that, at about 1 p.m. the employee assaulted one clerk Devtale, also an employee at dispensary of E.S.I. Hospital. This was in the presence of Dr. Karikatte. The Doctor, it appears, was so incensed by the incident that he wrote a letter of complaint to the employer and an a result thereof disciplinary proceedings commenced against the employee. It was alleged that he had committed breach of the standing orders. Ultimately, as a result of the enquiry, the factual findings whereof were against the respondent-emplo...
Tag this Judgment!Vithal Raoji Lakhan Vs. Vasudeo Raghu Dawane and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-20-1990
Reported in: 1990(2)BomCR254
H.H. Kantharia, J.The petitioner is a tribal. The first respondent is a non-tribal.2. The petitioner was a tenant on 1-4-1957 (i.e. the Tillers day) in respect of the following lands.Survey No. Area AssessmentRs. Ps.15/2 Part 1-00 2.42 (Paddy land)15/2 Part. 3-20 0.39 (Warkas land)He became the tenant-purchaser of the said lands under the provisions of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948.3. The petitioner agreed to sell the suit lands to the first respondent and executed an agreement of sale in that behalf on June 21, 1971. For the said sale he was to obtain necessary permission from the Collector. On receipt of part payment of Rs. 1,000/-, the petitioner put the first respondent in possession of the suit lands and made an application to the Collector for permission to sell the suit lands on February 3, 1974 which application is still pending as stated at the Bar.4. In the meanwhile, the petitioner made an application on or about October 27, 1975 to the Collector reques...
Tag this Judgment!Gajanan Narayan Patil and ors. Vs. Dattatraya Waman Patil and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-20-1990
Reported in: 1990(3)BomCR166
B.C. Ray, J.1 This is, an appeal under Art. 133, of the Constitution of India against the Judgment and Order dated October 23, 1989 passed by the High Court of Bombay in Writ Petn. No. 3976 of 1989 whereby the High Court directed the Registrar of Co-operative Societies to give fresh notice to the elected members as well as to the 3 persons namely 2 nominees of the Financial institutions and the expert co-opted member.2. The matrix of the case is that the appellants who are the duly elected Directors of the Sanjay Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. hereinafter to be as 'Karkhana signed a requisition and sent the same to the respondent No. 3, the Joint Director of Sugar and Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies Maharashtra State, Pune requesting him to summon a special meeting of the Committee of the Karkhana to consider the proposed motion of no-confidence against the Chairman of the Committee, Dattatraya Waman Patil, respondent No. 1. The requisition was signed by more then 1/3rd of the t...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Central Excise Vs. Weldekar Laminates (Pvt.) Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-19-1990
Reported in: (1990)(29)ECC219
1. This is an appeal filed by the Collector of Central Excise, Bombay-Ill, against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) bearing No. AMP-465/B-III-215/88 dated 22-7-1988 allowing the appeal of the respondents on merits.2. Brief facts of the case for the purpose of disposal of this appeal can be stated as below.3. The respondents are the manufacturers of decorative laminate sheets falling under Heading 39 of the Central Excise Tariff. They were receiving duty paid BOPP films classifiable under Heading 3902.31 for use in the manufacture of laminated sheets. They had availed of credit of duty paid on these films, since both the final product and the input were notified under the MOD VAT scheme. The department objected to the availment of the credit of the duty paid on these films used in the manufacture of laminated sheets on the ground that these films act as separators, while putting the sheets into the press and do not constitute as an input in the manufacturing proce...
Tag this Judgment!Maria Philomina Pereira Vs. M/S. Rodrigues Construction a Partnership ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-19-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Bom27; 1990(2)BomCR77; (1990)92BOMLR164
1. This is an appeal by the original plaintiff. She filed a suit, being Short. Cause Suit No. 3230 of 1989, in the Bombay City Civil Court at Bombay, apparently, for specific performance of an agreement dated 21-2-1983 together with the agreement dated 4-8-1980 and sought a decree for possession of a flat bearing No. 11, on the first floor of the building known as Mary Apartments, situated at Borivali, Bombay.2, The consideration mentioned in the agreement is about Rs. 87,000/-. When theplaintiff took out a notice of motion for interim reliefs the defendants contended that that Court had no pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit. Naturally, the learned Judge had to decide that question under S. 9-A of the Code of Civil Procedure. The learned Judge, by his judgment and order dated 17-7-1989 held that that Court has no jurisdiction and the plaint was ordered to be returned to the plaintiff for being presented before the proper Court. This appeal is against this judgment and...
Tag this Judgment!Swati Chemicals Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-19-1990
Reported in: 1990(50)ELT342(Bom)
1. The Petitioners, Swati Chemicals, have in this Writ Petition prayed for a writ of certiorari for scrutinising the records of their case before the Assistant Collector of Customs and the Collector of Customs (Appeals) and to quash the impugned order of the Assistant Collector dated 20-2-1985 and the impugned order dated 1-1-1987 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals).2. Briefly stated, the facts concerning the present Writ Petition are that the Petitioners imported Active Erythromycin Thicyonate (TIOC) weighing 200 kgs. The consignment arrived at the Sahar Airport on 6-8-1984. The Petitioners filed a Bill of Entry for home consumption in respect of the same consignment on 10-8-1984. The Petitioners claimed partial exemption from customs duty in respect of the said consignment under Notification No. 64/79-Cus., dated 6-3-1979 as amended by the Notification No. 41/83-Cus., dated 1-3-1983 showing that TIOC was exempt from payment of customs duty in excess of 25 per cent ad valorem...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »