Mumbai Court January 1991 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.
Harish Sakharam Savardekar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)BomCR538; [1991(63)FLR111]; (1994)IIILLJ93Bom; 1991(1)MhLj289
S.M. Daud, J. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution takes exception to an order for damages made under Section 14B of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952-hereinafter referred as 'the Act'. 2. Petitioner was the proprietor of a concern doing business in the name and style of M/s. Himachem Laboratories at Bhandup, Bombay. On 13/15th April, 1978, the petitioner and his employees made an application to the 2nd respondent, hereinafter referred to as 'the Commissioner', for coverage under Section 1(4) of the Act. The Commissioner on 13th July 1978 allotted a code number to the petitioner and declared the provisions of the Act and the scheme framed under the said Act to be applicable to the petitioner's establishment as from 1st April 1978. On 20th October 1984, the Commissioner gave a notice with particulars to the petitioner calling upon him to show-cause why an order for levy of damages should not be made against him under Section 14B of th...
Electric Construction and Equipment Co. Ltd. Vs. Hukam N. Sharma and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1991
Reported in: (1993)IIILLJ312Bom
S.M. Daud, J. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution questions the legality of respondent 2's order directing petitioner to pay respondent 1 a sum of Rs. 1,080/- representing bonus for the accounting year 1981-82.2. Respondent 1 was in the employ of the petitioner as a Chief Cashier. In that capacity he was attending to withdrawals from banks and payment of salaries and wages etc. Accounts showing the receipts and disbursements were being maintained by him. Suspecting malpractices, an investigation was carried out and the same revealed misappropriation of Rs. 85,058.00 accompanied by fabrication of documents on the part of respondent 1. By virtue of an accord vide Ref. No. 47/1979 in terms of a Settlement the petitioner was paying bonus to its workmen. Employees not being workmen though not covered by the Settlement or Award were also being paid bonus. For the accounting year 1981-82, a bonus of 12% of annual earnings was paid to the workmen as also non-workmen employee...
Smt. Suman Kanji Hodar Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)BomCR82; 1991(1)MhLj576
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. This petition has been filed by the next of kin of one Suresh alias Surya Sitaram Pawar who is a convict undergoing the sentence of life imprisonment at the Yeravada Central Prison, Pune. The petitioner has, through this petition, contended that since the prisoner has undergone the full term of sentence, he is entitled to a direction for his immediate release from the prison. It appears that the petitioner had filed an earlier Criminal Writ Petition No. 540 of 1990. However, that Petition came to be withdrawn as the respondents had contended in the course of their reply that the prisoner was not entitled to the benefit of remissions by virtue of an order dated 5th June, 1985 that has been passed against him on the ground that he had committed certain prison offences and that consequently he was liable to be retained in the prison for an additional period of two years. The order dated 5th June, 1985, which is Annexure 'E' to the petition, has also been challenged by ...
Dilip Laxman Kokare Vs. S.M. Ambedkar and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)BomCR85; (1991)93BOMLR852; 1991(1)MhLj833
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. The petitioner, in this case, has challenged the order of externment dated 17-9-1990 as also an appellate order for the State Government dated 22-11-1990 confirming the earlier externment order.2. The petitioner was served with a notice dated 15-3-1989 by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Zone-II, Bombay, asking him to show cause as to why action by way of an externment order should not be taken against him. It is unnecessary to set out the grounds on which the proposed action was contemplated because that the solitary ground urged before us by Mr. Nasik, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that there has been an abnormal delay in the passing of the externment order and that the delay of approximately 11/4 years vitiates the order passed against the petitioner.3. As against this, Mr. Chopda, learned A.P.P. appearing for the respondents has drawn our attention to the affidavit of the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone-II, filled in reply to...
Smt. Suman Kanji Hodar Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-1991
Reported in: (1991)93BOMLR465; 1991CriLJ2896
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. This petition has been filed by the next of kin of one Suresh alias Surya Sitaram Pawar who is a convict undergoing the sentence of life imprisonment at the Yeravada Central Prison, Pune. The petitioner has, through this petition, contended that since the prisoner has undergone the full term of sentence, he is entitled to a direction for his immediate release from the prison. It appears that the petitioner had filed an earlier Criminal Writ Petition No. 540 of 1990. However, that Petition came to be withdrawn as the respondents had contended in the course of their reply that the prisoner was not entitled to the benefit of remissions by virtue of an order dated 5th June 1985 that has been passed against him on the ground that he had committed certain prison offences and that consequently he was liable to be retained in the prison for an additional period of two years. The order dated 5th June 1985, which is Annexure 'E' to the petition, has also been challenged by th...
State Bank of India Vs. the Podar Mills Limited and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-22-1991
Reported in: AIR1991Bom370; (1991)93BOMLR957; [1992]74CompCas710(Bom)
ORDERBharucha, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order of Guttal, J. making absolute the Chamber Summons filed by the applicant (the 6th respondent before us) to make it a defendant to the suit.2. The 1st respondents have textile undertakings in Bombay and Jaipur. The management of the Bombay undertaking was taken over in 1983 by the National Textile Corporation under the provisions -of the Textile Undertakings (Taking Over of Management) Act, 1983. The Jaipur unit was closed on 2nd August, 1985. 3. On 18th December, 1986 the appellants, who are a nationalised bank, filed this suit against the 1st respondents, their directors and the National Textile Corporation to recover the sum of (approximately) Rs. 14.76 crores which had been advanced by the appellants to the 1st respondents on the security of the mortgage of immoveable property and the hypothecation of plant and machinery. On 14th February, 1987 the appellants took out a Notice of Motion for the appointment of the ...
Abdul Kadir Razzaque Beg Vs. the Sub-divisional Magistrate (S.S. Zende ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-22-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)BomCR589; (1991)93BOMLR760; 1991CriLJ1725; 1991(1)MhLj474
Saldanha, J. 1. This Criminal Writ Petition is directed against an order of externment dated 31-3-1990 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Nasik Sub-Division, Nasik, under which the Petitioner was externed from the limits of Nasik District for a period of two years. The Petitioner thereafter filed an appeal before the State Government, which came to be dismissed by an order dated 13-6-1990. 2. Before dealing with the specific facts of the present case, we consider it necessary to advert to one peculiarity that is prevalent with a degree of consistence in a large number of externment appeals that have been decided by the State Government. We have brought it to the notice of Mr. Kothari, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the Respondents, that the wording of the orders passed by the State Government in all these cases is so similar that it almost appears to this Court that the concerned officers are passing cyclostyled orders with the minimum amount of modification as far a...
Sopan Sakharam Bhosale Vs. Shaikh Maheboob S/O Shaikh ShamshuddIn (Die ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-22-1991
Reported in: 1991(3)BomCR526
N.P. Chapalgaonker, J.1. Survey No. 213 admeasuring 16 Acres and 1 Guntha and Survey No. 131 admeasuring 21 Acres and 21 Gunthas, both situated at Kallamb in Osmanabad District, were owned by Shaikh Maheboob and Shaikh Ahmed s/o. Hasanji, respectively and the petitioner admittedly was in possession of these lands as tenant. Two separate applications appears to have been made under section 44 of the Hyderabad Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 for the resumption of these lands for personal cultivation by landlords mentioned above. These applications claiming restoration of possession of these lands along with other lands in possession of other tenants were allowed by Tahsildar on 16-11-1959 and 30-11-1959 and the landlords were directed to be put in possession by restoring the land. Two appeals bearing Tenancy Appeals 41/44/59 and 43/44/59 came to be filed before the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms), Osmanabad, and these two appeals were partly allowed by the Deputy Collector, Land R...
Jaikisandas Balchand Pamnani and Another Vs. Municipal Corporation of ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-21-1991
Reported in: AIR1991Bom341
ORDER1. This petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution impugns an auction sale in exercise of the power vested in the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay vis-a-vis S. 206 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act being Bombay Act No. III of 1888 (Act).2. Property measuring 813.112 sq. mts. and bearing City Survey No. 8A/100 together with the structure thereon, described with greater precision in para 2 of the petition belonged to Balchand M. Pamnani. Petitioners are the sons of the said Balchand who expired on 11-1-1984. Property taxes due on the said property inclusive of and up to 31-3-1982 had been paid. Taxes due as from 1-4-1982 were in arrears for which reason the property was attached u/S.203 of the Act. After the attachment had been effected the Corporation issued a sale proclamation. The advertisement was published in various newspapers of Bombay and the correct translation of that appearing in the 'Bombay Samachar' dated 8-4-1985 is to be found at Ex. J. Therein the parti...
Arbuda Bhuvan Tea Shop and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-21-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)BomCR129; [1991(62)FLR530]; (1992)ILLJ807Bom
1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution takes various contentions in respect of Notification dated October 31, 1985 annexed at Ex.E being annexure to the petition. 2. Petitioners are owners of what is described as 'tea shop' and an association of such owners doing business in the preparation, distribution and sale of the beverage tea in Greater Bombay. The Minimum Wages Act, 1948 - hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' - is a piece of legislation enabling fixing of minimum rates of wages in certain employments. At the time the Act was introduced, it had a Schedule consisting of two parts, being know as 'Part I' and 'Part II'. These parts did not include employment in hotels, restaurants and eating houses. By the Minimum Wages (Maharashtra Amendment) Act, 1960 Part I of the Schedule was further amended to include :- 'Employment in any residential hotel, restaurant or eating house as defined in the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948. (shops Act)' 'Restaurant or eati...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »