Mumbai Court August 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.
Mah. Gen. Jonathan Reuben Samson Vs. Zillah Solomon and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Bom222; 1991(1)BomCR334
ORDER1. This petition is for (a) setting aside the order dated 30th November, 1989 disposing with the service of citations and revoking the grant of Letters of Administration issued to respondents Nos. 1 and 2 pursuant to the said order, (aa) removing or discharging respondents Nos. 1 and 2 as administrators of the estate of late Rachel Hyams and appointing the petitioner in their place as administrator and (b) suitable orders/directions regarding accounts, disclosures, etc. for ascertaining the damages for loss caused to the estate by respondents Nos. 1 and 2.2. The facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows :(a) The matter concerns the estate of one Rachel Hyams, who died on 15th October, 1978. The petitioner (Jonathan) is the brother of Rachel. Respondent No. 1 (Zillah) is the niece of Rachel being the daughter of Daisy, who is the sister of Rachel. Respondents Nos. 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 (Emannuel, Asher, Disna, Daisy, Elsie and Sophie) are brothers and sisters of the sa...
Mahesh Mathuradas Chandan Vs. Mathuradas Jadhavji Chandan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Bom364; 1990(3)BomCR753
ORDER1. This revision takes exception to the orders passed by the Court of appeal upon applications marked Exs. 18 and 19 in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 61 of 1990.2. The petitioner is the son and he has instituted a suit against the respondent, his father, claiming an injunction that the latter be restrained from interfering with the conduct of business being carried on by him in the name and style of 'Chandan Chemical Products'. It was petitioner's contention that he was the sole and exclusive owner of the business though respondent was at times allowed to work therein but in a purely managerial capacity. The respondent's stand was the exact opposite viz. that the business belonged to him exclusively though he was using the name of his son to run it. An interim injunction was granted in favour of the petitioner and that led to the respondent assailing the same by way of Misc. Civil Appeal No. 61 of 1990. In the course of a hearing on 20th March 1990, the learned Additional District Judge ...
Narpatraj Besarmal Mehta and Others Vs. A. Baidya, Competent Authority ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1990
Reported in: (1991)95CTR(Bom)41; [1991]189ITR452(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. By this petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the jurisdiction of the Competent Authority to issue notice dated July 14, 1987, under section 269D(1) and the jurisdiction of the Valuation Officer to issue notice dated September 23, 1987, under section 269L of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. The petitioners purchased the suit property for a sum of Rs. 30,00,000 under an agreement of sale dated July 16, 1986. The property comprised of a building standing on or about 6,377 sq. mts. of land. It was tenanted and was purchased on the 'as is where is' basis. Form No. 37EE was filed by the petitioners and the sellers before the appropriate authority as require under section 269AB(2) of the Income-tax Act. Form No. 37-I was also filed on October 15, 1986. A certificate under section 269UL(3) of the Income-tax Act dated February 5, 1986, was issued under letter dated February 16, 1987, by the appropriate authority to the effect that ...
Shantilal Bhogilal Jhaveri and Others Vs. C.L. Bhatia Fifth Wto, and O ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1990
Reported in: (1991)92CTR(Bom)241; [1991]187ITR395(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. The challenge in this petition is to the reference to the District Valuation Officer by the Wealth-tax Officer, C.I. Ward, Bombay, under section 16A of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, for determination of the value of the property in dispute. The reference was made on January 6, 1981. Notices under section 16A and under section 16A(4) have been issued by the Valuation Officer on January 21, 1981, and February 20, 1981. The proceedings relate to the assessment years 1972-73 to 1980-81. It is common ground that, at the time the Wealth-tax Officer referred the case to the District Valuation Officer under section 16A, the assessments for the assessment years 1972-73 to 1975-76 had already been completed. The first question is whether the reference made by the Wealth-tax Officer under section 16A to a District Valuation Officer for valuation of the property after the assessments have been completed is valid. This issue is covered by our court's decision in the case of Smt. Bella ...
Shaikh Raheman S/O Sk. Ibrahim Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1990
Reported in: 1991(1)BomCR263
H.W. Dhabe, J.1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is preferred against the orders of the Courts below dismissing the application of the petitioner filed under section 94 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Cr.P.C.)2. On 14-5-1990, the petitioner found that his truck bearing Registration No. MHV. 7677 was stolen. He, therefore, lodged a complaint in the Police Station, Akola, on 15-5-1990 that his truck was stolen at night on 14-5-1990 and that it has been stolen by Guptaji and Kazi Saheb, residents of Yeotmal. He, therefore, requested that investigation should be made in the offence of theft and the accused should be suitably punished. Since nothing happened, he made an application to the Police Inspector, Police Station, Yavatmal on 18-5-1990 that his aforesaid truck was stolen by Guptaji and Kazi Saheb and that it is kept by them in front of Sarkari Bank near the Police Station. Inspite of these complaints, no steps were taken by the Poli...
Gopal Rao Vs. Sau Sarla
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1990
Reported in: II(1991)DMC261
A.A. Desai, J.1. The non-applicant wife Sarla availed the maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code at the rate of Rs. 150/- per month. In revision, the learned Sessions Judge reversed the order. The non-applicant-Sarla thereupon approached this Court by invoking the revisional jurisdiction under sub-Section (2) of Section 397 of the Code. This Court set aside the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge and restored the order of the learned Magistrate.2. In this application, purported to be under Section 482 of the Code, Mr. Bapat, the learned Counsel appearing for the applicant-husband made a grievance that this Court decided the revision presented by non-applicant wife without hearing the counsel for the applicant-husband. As such, the judgment as rendered is illegal and the same needs to be rectified to meet the ends of justice and he is entitled to be heard on the merit of the matter. He submitted that the import of Section 482 of the Code does not suffer from any...
Veena Estate Pvt. Ltd. and Another Vs. A. Baidya, Competent Authority, ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1990
Reported in: (1991)102CTR(Bom)303; [1991]189ITR456(Bom); [1991]54TAXMAN233(Bom)
T. D. SUGLA J. - By this petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner-company has challenged the jurisdiction of the Competent Authority to issue the notice dated July 14, 1987, under section 269D of the Income-tax Act, 1961. An agreement was entered into between Kapadia Development Co-operative Society Ltd. M/s. Century Builders and the petitioner-company on August 26, 1986. The terms of the agreement broadly are that the petitioner-company in consideration of the societys and builders allowing and permitting the petitioner-company as developers rights to develop the property in dispute and construct buildings thereon and a further right to sell and dispose of the flats/shops/offices/garages and other premises so construed. The petitioner shall provide at its own cost 50 flats (each flat of the size of about 500 sq. ft.) to the society and pay Rs. 5,00,00,000 to the builders in the manner provided in the agreement.Initially, the parties to the agreement filed...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Narayan Champalal Bajaj
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-1990
Reported in: 1991(1)BomCR513; 1990CriLJ2635
A.A. Desai, J.1. By this appeal at the instance of State and revision application on behalf of the Commissioner of Income-tax, the appellant and revisionist have questioned the validity and correctness of the finding of acquittal for the offence punishable under S. 275A of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), Section 406 and S. 461 of the Penal Code.2. Pursuant to authorisation under sub-section (1) of S. 132 of the Act, P.W. 3 Prasad on 29-10-1985 undertook search of the premises of respondent accused Narayan Bajaj. The search continued till 9.30 p.m. However, it was incomplete. During the course, P.W. 3 Prasad and the raiding party separated the pawned jewellery and kept it in the almirah. The almirah has sealed. P.W. 3 Prasad then issued prohibitory order purported to be under sub-section (3) of S. 132 of the Act. Seizure Panchanama (Exh. 21) was drawn.3. P.W. 3 Prasad and his party next day, i.e. on 30-10-1985 resumed and continued their search. They opened th...
Chinai and Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-1990
Reported in: [1994]206ITR616(Bom)
Mrs. Sujata Manohar, J.1. assessee-company is a private limited company. It acted as the managing agents of Messrs. National Rayon Corporation Ltd., right from the year 1947, till December 31, 1969. The managing agency system was statutorily abolished with effect from April 3, 1970. In view of this abolition, when the managing agency of the assessee-company expired on December 31, 1969, it was not renewed for any further period. The points at issue before us relate to the assessment year 1971-72 for which the previous year is the year ending on December 31, 1970. The assessment, therefore, is in respect of the year immediately succeeding the year in which the managing agency of the assessee-company came to an end.2. During the previous year ending on December 31, 1970, the assessee-company derived income from dividends amounting to Rs. 2,89,412 and income from interest amounting to Rs. 25,904. This income was taxed by the Income-tax Officer under the head 'Income from other sources'. A...
Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-1990
Reported in: [1991]189ITR325(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. By this petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the letter dated June 9, 1988, issued to it by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Assessment), Special Range, Dehradun, for recovery of Rs. 5,69,11,730 being demand raised for the assessment year 1985-86 in the case of M/s. Micoperi S. P. A., Italy.2. It appears that, under an agreement entered into by the petitioner with Micoperi S. P. A., the tax liability of Mociperi S. P. A. was undertaken by the petitioner-company and the above notice was issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Assessment) on that basis.3. Shri Dalvi, learned counsel for the petitioner, states that, by an order of this court dated September 5, 1988, in Appeal No. 1049 of 1988 arising out of Writ Petition No. 1306 of 1988, the assessment in pursuance of which the said demand was raised and the petitioner was asked to make the payment was quashed. This court also d...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »