Mumbai Court October 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.
The Official Liquidator, High Court, Bombay Vs. United Commercial Bank ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-16-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Bom167; 1991(4)BomCR369; (1992)94BOMLR799
ORDERSukumaran, J.1. Workers versus Secured Creditors could be the cause title of this case. It is a class conflict, which has surfaced in the winding up planes of the corporate sector. Both sides have fought with arms and ammunitions garnered from the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. Who is the voctor, and who the vanquished is the final phase which spectators could wish to see. Intermediate stratagems and tacfics, and the fighting feats are, however, indispensable narratives required for the better appreciation of the final show. They are alluded to hereunder.2. The Company, Glass Carboys & Pressedwares Ltd., ran into financial straits. Its winding up was sought and got, when it was unable to pay its debts. The winding up order was passed on 15-11-1972, in Company Petition No. 27 of 1971.3. There were secured creditors, like the Maharashtra State Financial Corporation and united Commercial Bank. They could stand outside the winding up proceedings, and appropriate to them their ...
Firozali Abdulkarim Jivani, and Another Vs. the Union of India and Oth ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-16-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Bom179; (1991)93BOMLR662; 1992(1)MhLj1
ORDERMrs. Sujata Manohar, J. 1. The petitioners are members and shareholders of the Development Co-operative Bank Limited, the 6th respondent, which is a Multi-State Co-operative Society registered under the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 1984. The petitioners have filed the present writ petition challenging the acceptance by the returning officer (respondent No. 7) of the nomination of respondent No. 8, Baddruddin Ahmed Pradhan, for the post of the President of respondent No. 6 Bank at the elections held on 23rd April 1989 and the subsequent election of respondent No. 8 to the post of the President of respondent No. 6 Bank.2. For the purpose of this petition it is necessary to state in brief the history of this Bank, Prior to 30th June 1981 there was a Co-operative Bank known as the Ismailia Cooperative Rank Limited. Respondent No. 8 was the President of this bank since March 1979. There was also in existence another cooperative hank known as the Masalawala Cooperative Bank L...
Pearl Plastic Manufacturing Co. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-16-1991
Reported in: 1992(58)ELT41(Bom)
Sujata Manohar, J. 1. This group of Writ Petitions is in respect of imposition of additional duty of Customs (countervailing duty) on acrylic sheet scrap imported by these petitioners. Imports in some of these petitions are prior to 1st March, 1982, while imports in most of these petitions are subsequent to 1st of March, 1982. 2. The date of 1st of March, 1982 is relevant because after 1st of March, 1982 Explanation III has been added to Central Excise Tariff Item 15A which is the relevant item for the purpose of imposition of countervailing duty on acrylic sheet scrap. The relevant Tariff Item 15A prior to 1st of March, 1982 was as follows : 15A. 'ARTIFICIAL OR SYNTHETIC RESINS AND PLASTIC MATERIALS AND CELLULOSE ESTERS AND ETHERS, AND ARTICLES THEREOF - (1) The following artificial or synthetic resins and plastic materials, and cellulose esters and ethers, in any form, whether solid, liquid or pasty, or as powder, granules or flakes, or in the form of moulding powders, namely :- (i...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Griffon Laboratories Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-16-1991
Reported in: 1992(58)ELT36(Bom)
Bharucha, J.1. The appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned single judge making the writ petition filed by the respondents to the appeal absolute. The learned judge remitted the case to the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise for decision in accordance with the law pointed out in his judgment. The learned judge remarked that the stand taken by the appellants disclosed an unawareness of the provisions of Section 4 of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944. 2. The respondents manufacture medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations. Two of its preparations contain alcohol. These two preparations are, therefore, assessable to excise duty under the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Act, 1955, which is administered by the State Government. The basis for calculation of excise duty thereunder is the basis provided by Section 4 of the Central Act. 3. It is an admitted position that all the preparations of the respondents are sold through a company called F...
Super Processors Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-16-1991
Reported in: 1992(2)BomCR468; (1994)IIILLJ564Bom
Ashok Agarwal, J. 1. The petitioners are a partnership firm carrying on business inter alia of calendering of cotton clothes. The first respondent is the Union of India and the second respondent is Regional Provident Fund Commissioner for Maharashtra and Goa. By this petition, the petitioners, seek to impugn the order dated 15th March, 1985 passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner under Section 14-B of the Employees' Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (19 of 1952) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') claiming damages in the sum of Rs. 1,18,057.60 P. for delayed payment of provident fund contributions. The impugned order is annexed at Exhibit-'X' to the petition. The aforesaid order was preceded by a show cause notice dated 31st March, 1984 which called upon the petitioner to show cause in regard to the default committed in respect of payment of Employees' Provident Fund contributions, the Family Pension Fund and the Deposit Linked Insurance Fund contributi...
Dinkar Ramchandra Ambonkar Vs. Photophone Limited and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-16-1991
Reported in: (1994)IIILLJ1107Bom
B.N. Sri Krishna, J.1. By this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has impugned an Award dated 7th January, 1983, made by the Industrial Tribunal, Bombay, in Reference (IT) No. 23 of 1980 under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The petitioner was in the employment of the first respondent as a Miller in the Machine Shop. He joined service on 6th May, 1970 as a casual workman, was appointed on probation as a Miller on 12th October, 1970, and confirmed in service as a Miller on 12th April, 1971. He came to be retrenched from service with effect from 11th August, 1978 by an order of Retrenchment dated 11th August, 1978. The workman, through his union, raised an industrial dispute, demanding reinstatement in service with full back-wages, and the said dispute came to be referred to the Industrial Tribunal, Bombay, and was marked as Reference (IT) No. 23 of 1980.3. The principal contention of ...
Collector of Customs and Central Vs. Chowgule Brothers
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-15-1991
Reported in: (1993)(63)ELT282Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The Departmental authorities have filed the present application vide Section 130(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, seeking reference to the High Court on the questions, formulated by them as the questions of law, arising out of our Order No. 25/90 WRB, dated 10-01-1990, in Appeal No.C/328/89 Bom arising out of Order-in-Original No. 9/89-Addl. Collr., dated 30-3-1989 of the Additional Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Panaji, Goa.2. There is a delay of 27 days in filing the Reference Application. Due cause for delay is shown and we are satisfied that the delay is not on account of any negligence. Delay is accordingly condoned.3. Two trawlers registered at Panama and chartered by M/s. BRS Marine Ltd., New Delhi, who held the permit to fish, issued by the Ministry of Agriculture, vide permit dated 18-12-1985, had reached the Port of Marmagoa, on 4-3-1988, and their declared base port was Goa. For their entry Inwards etc. papers were filed by M/s. Chowgule Brothers (the Respondents i...
Dayashankar Singh and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-15-1991
Reported in: 1992(1)BomCR665; (1992)94BOMLR30
Sujata Manohar, J.1. Dayashankar Singh, Ramchandra Mourya, Kailash Meena and Bhiku Shripati Kanjale are the petitioners in these Writ Petition Nos. 1815 of 1985, 1574 of 1984, 1816 of 1986 and 1779 of 1985 respectively. These petitioners were appointed as Rakshaks in the Railway Protection Force some time during the period 1965 to 1971. At the material time, these petitioners were working as Rakshaks with the Western Railway. 2. Dayashankar Singh was at the material time, assigned the duty of guarding Mahalaxmi Yard which is a property belonging to the Western Railway. Mahalaxmi Yard adjoins a siding known as Kachra siding where railway coaches which are scrapped are stored. Kailash Meena and Ramchandra Mourya were, at the material time, assigned the duty of guarding the coaches in Kachra siding. Mahalaxmi Yard is surrounded by high walls and wire fencing on all sides. The entrance to Mahalaxmi Yard is only through the main gate. The duty of guarding the main gate at the material time ...
Atlas Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-1991
Reported in: (1993)LC317Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Original No. 10/MP/SRT Addl. Collr./1991 dated nil communicated on 15-2-1991 of the Additional Collector of Central Excise, Surat, confirming demand restricted to Rs. 4908.29 and imposing personal penalty of Rs. 2000/- on the appellant, vide Rule 173Q(1) of the Central Excise Rules.2. The Central Excise Officers of Headquarters, Baroda, on 23-11-1984 visited the factory premises of the appellants, as also of two Transport Companies, namely M/s. Shri Laxmi Transport Co., Vapi and M/s. Taj Associates, Vapi, and inspected the records. The inspection resulted in recovery of ten transport receipts, which appeared to have been issued without Central Excise G.P.I, and it appeared that 50,654 Kgs of paper and paper boards were removed by the appellants without payment of duty during the financial year 1981-82 to 1984-85.Statements of the persons concerned both, at the appellants factory premises as also at the concerned transport companies, were...
Estrela Batteries Limited Vs. Industrial Finance Corporation of India ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-1991
Reported in: 1992(2)BomCR386
K. Sukumaran, J.1. M/s. Estrella Batteries Ltd; are the appellants. There are five respondents. Those vitally affected are respondents 1,2 & 4, who are respectively, the Industrial Finance Corporation, the successful purchasers, and the Receiver.2. The appeal is directed against the order of Cazi, J., allowing the prayers (a) and (c) as contained in report of the Receiver dated 20-9-1991.3. The brief facts leading to the appeal are as follows:---The Industrial Finance Corporation filed an Application as Misc. Petition No. 553 of 1986 (under section 30 of the Industrial Finance Corporation Act, 1948), praying for sale of the properties of Estrella Batteries Limited, respondent No. 1 in the application, in enforcement of a monetary claim, which, as on 23-11-1986, came to Rs. 1,22,18,837.09. The amount had been advanced way back in the year 1971. An order appointing ad-interim Receiver of the entire properties was passed on 26-11-1985. The Receiver took actual possession of the properties...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »