Mumbai Court February 1990 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.
M/S. Steelmans Advertising Agencies Pvt. Ltd., Bombay Vs. the Municipa ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-07-1990
Reported in: AIR1990Bom338; 1990(2)BomCR151; 1990(1)MhLj759
(1) Can there be a tenancy on a public road? This is the question which requires to be determined in this appeal.(2) The Appellant-Company (the Plaintiffs) is an advertising company. They were granted permission for installation of ornamental grill-work poles for outdoor displays, referred to in these proceedings as, 'Pole-Ads' under an agreement dated 28th February 1978 entered into between the Municipal Corporation, the respondents herein, and the Appellants. The idea is to beautiful the City of Bombay and for propagating civic, traffic and other worthy causes. The relevant clauses of the agreement are as follows :'1. The Deputy Municipal Commissioner do hereby grant unto the Company the monthly tenancies of the land covered by Pole-ads and more particularly described in the columns (2) (3) and (4) of the schedule hereunder written.' '2. The company shall pay to the Deputy Municipal Commissioner ground rent at the rate of Rs. 1,35,000/- per annum (Rupees One Lac Thirtyfive Thousand o...
Food Corporation of India Employees Assocn. and anr. Vs. Fci and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-07-1990
Reported in: (1991)IILLJ562Bom
Kamat, J.1. The first petitioner is the Goa Unit and the second petitioner is the All India Trade Union of the employees of the Food Corporation of India, for short 'the Corporation' established under Section 45 of the Food Corporation Act, 1964. The Corporation has its regional office at Bombay of which the second respondent is the Senior Regional Manager and its district office at Marmagoa at Goa of which the third respondent is the District Manager.2. The controversy in this petition relates to the withdrawal of the benefit of overtime allowance which was made available to the employees of the Corporation under the provisions of the Goa, Daman and Diu Shops and Establishments Act, 1973, and falling back upon overtime allowance as is applicable to the employees of the Central Government without any prior notice of the change.3. Shortly stated, the facts are that prior to the coming into force of the Goa, Daman and Diu Shops and Establishments Act, 1973, the employees of the Corporati...
Vishwanath Sawant Vs. Gandabhai Kikabhai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-07-1990
Reported in: 1990(2)BomCR406
Ashok Agarwal, J.1. Whether the defendant is a rank trespasser or a licensee, if he is a licensee whether his possession is protected under the Bombay Rent Act; whether the City Civil Court or the Court of Small Causes under section 41 of the Presidency Small Causes Courts Act or under section 28 of the Bombay Rent Act has jurisdiction are some of the questions which have been debated before me in the present Appeal.2. The present suit has been instituted by one Daulatrai Mohanlal Kothari acting as the Constituted Attorney of the plaintiff. By this suit, the plaintiff seeks to recover possession of the suit premises being Room No. 10, Noor Mahal, now known as Baughwala Mahal at 125/127, Sir Ratan Tata Road, Tardeo, Bombay - 400 034.3. Shortly stated it is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant is in unauthorised use and occupation of the suit premises. The defendant however, claims to be the plaintiff's licensee in respect thereof. According to the plaintiff, the defendant had fo...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. V.S. Engineering
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-06-1990
Reported in: (1991)LC365Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal directed against the order of the Collector (Appeals) bearing No. V-2(85 CETA) 2578/87-Bom-I, dated 22-2-1989 allowing the appeal of the respondents on the ground of time bar and setting aside the order of the Assistant Collector confirming the demand.2. Shri K.M. Mondal, the learned SDR on behalf of the Department gave the following requisite facts for disposal of the appeal. In this case Modvat credit on certain inputs was allegedly taken irregularly in the month of September 1986 and RT-12 returns were filed alongwith the relevant extracts of RG 23A (Part II), from which the Supdt. came to know of the irregular payment of credit and made an endorsement on the RT-12 Return, pointing out the ineligibility and asking the respondents to pay the duty of Rs. 12,855.72. The assessment of RT-12 Returns and endorsement was made on 24-2-1987. It was also followed up by a show cause notice dated 2-4-1987 on the basis of which the demand was confirmed by the Assistant Coll...
Cawasji Nasarwanjee Dinshaw Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-06-1990
Reported in: 1990(2)BomCR604
T.D. Sugla, J.1 The appellants in these appeals are Mr. Cawasji Nasarwanji Dinshaw, Mrs. Alloo Persi Kama and Mrs. M.R. Patel, brother and sisters respectively. They are the original claimants. They owned certain lands at Lonawala. The lands were acquired by the State Government for constructing an approach road to the railway crossing. The suit lands were out of two survey numbers. Hence there were two notifications for the purpose published in the Official Gazette in October, 1970. The claimants had equal shares in the suit lands. Each of them filed two claims each i.e. one in respect of land under one survey number and the second in respect of the other. This explains why there are six Land Acquisition References and six appeals though the judgment of the trial Court is common.2. One of the contentions raised by Shri Rane, the learned Counsel for the claimants is that in view of the amendment of section 28 of the Act with effect from September, 1984 the claimants are entitled to a h...
Vatschala Uttam More (Smt.) Vs. Shivaji Dnyanu Patil and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-05-1990
Reported in: 1990ACJ1001; 1990(2)BomCR276; (1990)92BOMLR268
Ashok Agarwal, J.1. This Appeal seeks to challenge the judgment and order dated the 22nd December, 1989 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Satara in M.A.C.P. No. 217 of 1988 whereby the applicant's application under section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act for payment of compensation on the principle of no fault liability was rejected.2. On the 29th October, 1987 at about 4.00 a.m. an accident occurred on the high-way never village Kavathe in Taluka Wai, District Satara. In a collusion between a truck and a petrol tanker, the petrol tanker was over turned and thrown on the side of the highway. The incident which gave rise to the filing of the present application occured at about 7.00 a.m. when the tanker exploded killing 27 persons and injuring about 31 persons on the spot. The present applicant is a claimant in respect of the death of her son. She made an application to the Tribunal for grant of compensation of Rs. 15,000/- under section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. By the impug...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›