Mumbai Court September 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.
Singhania Associates Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-1990
Reported in: 1991LC432(Bombay); 1991(52)ELT183(Bom)
1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution takes exception to non-clearance of goods imported under Exh. B which is an imprest licence dated 11th May 1981.2. Petitioner had obtained several licences which were of the same kind as Exh. B. figuring in the instant case. Exh. B. is an Imprest licence per para 149(3) of the Import Policy for the period April 1981 to March 1982, hereinafter referred to as 'AM 81-82'. The holders of such licences were allowed to import certain items free of import duty on condition that the imported articles were used for manufacture of goods which had to be exported within a specific time. After the export obligation had been fulfilled, the licensee could apply for an endorsement enabling him to import goods of the value equal to the value of the licence without there being a debit to the imprest licence. Petitioner fulfilled the obligation annexed to the imprest licence figuring in this case and obtained an endorsement on 18th March 1983 which w...
Roche Products Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-1990
Reported in: 1991LC58(Bombay); 1991(51)ELT238(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. The petitioners are a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and manufactures bulk drugs, synthetic vitamin 'A' in various forms, animal feed supplements and food additives and supplements at their factory at Balkum in Thane District. The products manufactured by the Company are liable to payment of excise duty under Tariff Item 68 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. By Notification dated April 30, 1975, the Central Government exempted the goods falling under Tariff Item 68 which were cleared from the factory of manufacture, for sale, from so much of duty of excise leviable thereon, as is in excess of the duty calculated on the basis of the invoice price charged by the manufacturer for the sale of such goods. To avail of this exemption, the manufacturers were required to file a written declaration to the effect that they were opting to avail of the exemption. The petitioner Company availed of the exemption by writing dated June 19, ...
Dinkarrao Bhausahab Deshmukh Vs. Mahadeo Tukaram Mohite Since Decease ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-1990
Reported in: 1991(2)BomCR670; 1991(1)MhLj17
Ashok Agarwal, J.1. The present petition has been filed by the original applicant tenant, who had filed the instant proceedings for possession under section 29(1) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity as' the Tenancy Act').2. The present case has a chequered history and the same will be evident from the following facts:---The petitioner was the tenant in respect of lands bearing Survey Nos. 9/1 B, 2B, 3B, 4B, 5B/1 of village Shirgaon, Tal. Khanapur, Dist. Sangli. The said lands admeasure about 3 acres and are assessed at Rs. 4-4-0 (Rupees Four, Four annas). The said land was originally owned by respondent No. 1 Mahadeo Tukaram Mohite, who is since deceased. His heirs and legal representatives have been brought on record. The suit land was sold under a registered sale-deed dated 13th March ,1959 to the original respondent No. 2 who is also since deceased and his heirs and legal representatives have also been brought on re...
Syed Mushtaque Ahmad Vs. Tasneem Kausar and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-1990
Reported in: I(1991)DMC524
D.J. Moharir, J.1. This is an application under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the rejection of applicant's contention that in view of the provisions of The Muslim Women's Act, 1986, he was no more liable to make provision for the maintenance of his daughter, after the latter attained the age of the two years. Facts may be stated thus, in brief.2. The present petitioner Syed Mushtaque was married to Smt. Syeda Kaniz Sibtain on 13-5-1984 at Nagpur. The child Tasneem Kausar was born to the couple on 6-6-1985. She therefore attained the age of two years on 6-6-1987. In the meanwhile on 30th October, 1985, the couple was divorced. Smt. Syeda Kaniz Sibtain quite obviously a well educated person, is a teacher in the Municipal High School at Nagpur under the Corporation of City of Nagpur. Being herself a person who had her own means of livlihood and was earning, she did not therefore herself seek any amount by way of maintenance from her husband. However on behalf of the...
Rajendrakumar Chandrakant Nadkarni Vs. University of Bombay and Anothe ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-05-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Bom126; 1991(1)BomCR96
ORDER1. This petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution questions the vires of the second part of Ordinance 237-A of the Ordinances and Regulations of the University of Bombay and Ex. F issued on the basis thereof.2. The petitioner and the second respondent were students doing the Master of Commerce course from a College affiliated to the Bombay University. For obtaining a M.Com. degree the candidate has to undergo two examinations conducted annually. Marks of both the examinations are aggregated for the purposes of ranking amongst the candidates. In the M.Com. Part I examination the petitioner had applied for a revaluation of his answer books in the subject of Cost Accounting. Initially, he was awarded 54 marks out of 100 marks, and upon a revaluation was given revised marks of 71. In the Part II examination, petitioner secured 240 marks out of 400 marks. The total for the two examinations worked out to 502 marks out of 800 marks. On 17-8-1983, under the signature of the Registrar of...
In Re: AlaIn Esteve
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-05-1990
Reported in: 1990(3)BomCR665; 1991CriLJ445
1. On 1st August, 1990 this Hon'ble Court issued a notice to the learned Advocate-General of Maharashtra seeking his assistance to determine the question as to whether the Bombay Children Act, 1948 has stood repealed on coming into force of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986. This question is now being determined after hearing submissions of the learned Advocate-General and all the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.2. For the purpose of consideration of the above question, it is necessary to refer to the legislative history of the two Acts and, briefly, to their respective provisions.3. On 1st December, 1986 the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 (Act No. 53 of 1986) received the assent of the President. The said Act is a Parliamentary Statute enacted to provide for the care, protection, treatment, development and rehabilitation of neglected or delinquent juveniles and for the adjudication of certain matters relating to, and disposition of, delinquent juveniles.4. On 13th day of August,...
Pudumjee Pulp and Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-05-1990
Reported in: 1991LC489(Bombay); 1991(51)ELT273(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. Petitioner No. 1 is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, and in its factory situate at Thergaon in Pune District, manufactures tracing paper. The manufacture of tracing paper is liable to payment of excise duty under Tariff Item No. 17 of First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). Tariff Item No. 17 reads as under :-'PAPER AND PAPER BOARD, ALL SORTS (including pasteboard, millboard, starboard, cardboard and corrugated board), in or in relation to the manufacture of which any process is ordinarily carried on with the aid of power. (1) Uncoated and coated printing and writing paper (other than poster paper). (2) Paperboard and all other kinds of paper (including paper or paperboards which have been subjected to various treatments such as coating, impregnating, corrugation, creping and design printing), not elsewhere specified.'Under Rule 173(B) of the Central Excise Rules, the company was required to file a...
Bombay Metropolitan Transport Corporation Ltd. Vs. Servants of the B.M ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-05-1990
Reported in: [1991(62)FLR401]; (1991)IILLJ443Bom; 1991(1)MhLj382
Bharucha, J.1. This is an appeal against the dismissal of the winding-up petition filed by the company itself under the provisions of Section 433(a), (e) and (f) of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act').2. The company was incorporated as a public company limited by shares on November 15, 1979 and was then called the CIDCO Transport Corporation Limited. It was a subsidiary of City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Limited ('CIDCO') and its share capital was held by CIDCO and its nominees. The Share of CIDCO itself are owned by the State of Maharashtra and its nominees. The object of the company was to carry on the business of carriage of passengers by road and water within and around New Bombay. The nominal capital of the company is Rs. 50,00,000/- divided into 50,000 shares and its issued and paid-up capital is Rs. 10,00,000/- divided into 10,000 shares. On June 17, 1980 the name of the company was changed to that which it presently bea...
Mohamad Ibrahimkhan S/O Khudobarkhan Since Deceased by L.Rs. Vs. Mehbo ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-05-1990
Reported in: 1991(1)BomCR152; 1991(1)MhLj369
N.P.Chapalgaonkar, J.1. Petitioner herein, owner of the house bearing No. 3-5-100 situated at Chudibazar, Aurangabad, filed a Small Cause Suit bearing No. 91/1981 in the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.) Aurangabad, claiming rent for the period from 1st October, 1979 to 28th February, 1981 for 17 months at the rate of Rs. 50/-. This suit came to be filed on 7th March, 1981. The defendant -tenant in the written statement contended that originally the rent agreed was only Rs. 8 per month and this was recovered once a year or sometimes six monthly and not regularly. It is further contended that the landlord being an influential person recovered rent at the rate of Rs. 10/- per month for some period, thereafter at the rate of Rs. 30/- per month and thereafter at the rate Rs. 50/- per month to which he was not at all entitled under the law. Relying on a reported judgement of this Court in the case Sk.Jameel Ahmed Sk. Farid v. Naseem Gulab Sk. w/o Syed Samshur Rahman Kadi 1981 ML.J. 847 the defend...
Bashir Shaikh Vs. State of Goa
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-05-1990
Reported in: 1991(1)BomCR266; (1991)92BOMLR324
M.S. Ratnaparkhi, J.1. The order of conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Margao on 7th February, 1990 in Sessions Case No. 28 of 1988, convicting the accused-appellant for an offence punishable under section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the 'ND and PS Act of 1985' for the sake of brevity), and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years, fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- or in default to further rigorous imprisonment for one year, has been challenged in this appeal.2. The accused-appellant came to be charge-sheeted before the Sessions Court for the offence of having in his possession about 35 grams of brown sugar. The prosecution sprang from the following facts. On 17th January, 1988, the PSI received an information that the accused was dealing in brown sugar. He, therefore, called two panchas and along with the party proceeded to the house of the accused at about 6.30 A.M. The party reached ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »