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.
State of Maharashtra Vs. B.K. Subbarao (Dr.)
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-1991
Reported in: 1992(2)BomCR557
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. This is an unfortunate proceeding that bristles with mala fides and, consequently, compels the conscience of this Court to pass an order that is in consonance with the principles of fairness and equity. The respondent, Dr. Subbarao, had filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 966 of 1990 which was a comprehensive challenge to the very validity of the main prosecution that had been instituted against him. Rule had been issued and the matter was pending for final hearing before a Division Bench of this Court in the month of February 1991. The Petition was high on the daily board and was due for final hearing. It is relevant to mention that when the petition was admitted, the Court had granted stay of the proceeding before the trial Court because the petition challenged the validity of those proceedings. Until the disposal of that petition, therefore, there could have been no question of the trial commencing or of the petitioner, who was the original accused, being required b...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Dr. B.K. Subbarao and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-12-1991
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2984
ORDER1. This petition/criminal revision application, presented by the State of Maharashtra, is directed against a judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, dated 26-4-1991. Through this petition, the State of Maharashtra has assailed the correctness of the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge whereby the respondent, whom I shall refer to as 'the Accused', has been discharged of certain offences punishable under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 and the Atomic Energy Act, 1962 a few facts that are relevant for the decision of this criminal revision application are alone being recounted by me. I need to prefix this judgment with the observations that this particular litigation has been preceded by a score of petitions addressed to the different Courts before which the prosecution was pending, to the High Court and, on more than one occasion, to the Supreme Court. The matter has been vigorously contested and it has been the contention of the Accus...
Goodluck Tyre Services Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-11-1991
Reported in: (1992)(42)LC321Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal is directed against the order in original No. 78/Addl.Collector/90 dated 27.7.1990 of the Addl. Collector, Ahmedabad, ordering confiscation of 202 tyres seized from the premises of the appellant and granting option to pay fine of Rs. 35,000/- in lieu of confiscation and also imposing personal penalty of Rs. 2,000/- on the appellant.2. On 7.8.1989 a search was carried out at the factory and godown premises of the appellants, who were indulged in tyre retreading business and found 67 tyres from the factory and 135 tyres from the godown premises, which were though used and old, were of foreign origin and without any cut and were in condition of being used with or without retreading. As no plausible explanation was given for licit acquisition the same were seized. Statement of Shri Sheikh Razak alias Babubhai, a partner in the appellant firm, was recorded on 9.8.1989 where he stated to have purchased those tyres under regular bill from M/s Gupta Tyres and M/s Ganpati Tyres ...
Mrs. Myra Joseph Braz Dias Vs. Joseph Braz Dias
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-11-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Bom142; 1991(4)BomCR396; (1992)94BOMLR814
ORDERK. Sukumaran, J.1. By his Order dated 19th April 1991 passed in Notice of Motion No. 1753 of 1990 M. J. Petition No. 626 of 1990, Variava, J. directed the husband to pay the wife Rs. 1,000/- per month as maintenance and Us. 10,000/-towards the costs, and issued a direction thatthe arrears upto March 1991 together with the sum of Rs. 10,000/- shall be paid within eight weeks from the date of the order. The husband and the wife have come up in appeal, the former by Appeal No. 867 of 1991 and the latter in appeal yet to be numbered.2. The learned Judge found the income of the husband to be in the region of Rs. 3,500/-per month. In reaching that tentative figure, the learned Judge had reckoned; (a) the possible balance in the hands of the husband out of a sum of Rs. two lakhs received by him as retiral benefit, in 1981, (b) the sale proceeds of the building at Dadar, a sum of Rs. 1,75,000/-, (c) rent of the building at Bandhra, (d) the income from the Bangalore premises of J. B. Enter...
Taj Trade and Transport Co. Ltd Vs. Oil and Natural Gas Commission and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-11-1991
Reported in: 1992(2)BomCR125; (1992)94BOMLR620; [1994]80CompCas740(Bom); 1992(2)MhLj1110
A.A. Cazi J. 1. I am passing orders on three suits which are for referring disputes to arbitration and on three petitions which are for interim reliefs in those proceedings. The circumstances giving rise to these proceedings are stated in the following paragraph. 2. It will be noticed the titles of the suits given above that the parties are the same in all three suits. However, the different suits have been filed because they arise from three different agreements which are in respect of three different shipping vessels, viz., (i) M. V. Ramey Tide, (ii) M. V. Jensen Tide, and (iii) M. V. Mire Tide. Suit No. 347 of 1991 arises from the agreement pertaining to M. V. Ramey Tide, Suit No. 348 of 1991 arises from the agreement pertaining to M. V. Jensen Tide and Suit No. 349 of 1991 arises from the agreement pertaining to M. V. Mire Tide. These three vessels are foreign vessels which the plaintiffs had chartered from the foreign owners, Tidewaters Marine Service Inc. Foreign vessels cannot b...
Assistant Collector of Customs (P), Bombay Vs. Madam Ayabo Atenda Ciad ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-11-1991
Reported in: 1992(1)BomCR383; 1992CriLJ2349; 1992(59)ELT369(Bom)
ORDER1. Points of law of some consequences have fallen for decision in this application. The Accused is a Nigerian lady, who is alleged to have been arrested as long backs as on 12-5-1987 by the Customs Officers while attempting to smuggle out of India narcotics valued at Rs. 2,00,000/-. The Accused was placed under arrest on charges punishable under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The record indicates that on 9-6-1987, the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, before whom the Accused was produced, ordered her release on bail in the sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- with one surety in the like amount along with certain conditions. The Accused could not avail of the bail and continued to be in custody, though the Court record indicated that there was an order for her release on bail or rather than the original bail order dated 9-6-1987 was still valid. 2. On 13-8-1987, the Customs Department filed a complaint before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bo...
Jai Hind Oil Mills Co. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-11-1991
Reported in: 1992(58)ELT199(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. Mr. Kantawala, learned Counsel for the petitioner handed over to us, a xerox copy of the public notice dated April 30, 1983, issued by the Assistant Collector of Customs, Correction Department, Bombay. The public notice brings to the attention of the importers the Notification dated April 16, 1983 issued by the Government of India, rescinding the earlier Notification dated July 30, 1982. Xerox copy is taken on record and marked 'X'. 2. The short question which falls for determination is whether the order of reassessment of duty dated May 12, 1983 by the Customs authority is in accordance with law. The petitioner imported dates and filed Bill of Entry on April 18, 1983. The Government of India in exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (2) of Section 14 of the Customs Act had fixed the tariff value for the goods specified in the notification. The duty on the import of dates under the Customs Tariff was 70% ad valorem, but in view of the notification the tariff value was...
PravIn Nanalal Shah Vs. S.N. Karkhanis, Collr. of Cus. (Appeals)
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-11-1991
Reported in: 1992(58)ELT35(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner is challenging legality of the order dated February 27, 1982 passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs, Customs House, confirming the order passed by the Assistant Collector confiscating the goods imported by the petitioner. The facts leading to the passing of this order are not in dispute and are required to be briefly stated to appreciate the grievance of the petitioner. 2. On June 29, 1981 REP licence was issued in favour of M/s. Janso Exports Pvt. Ltd. The Licence was transferable and the licensee transferred it in favour of the petitioner on July 11, 1981. In pursuance of the import licence, the petitioner imported 150 cases of Teachers' Highland Cream Scotch Whisky valued at Rs. 46,600/- and an import Bill of Entry was lodged on October 15, 1981. The Customs authorities did not grant clearance and served show cause memo dated December 19, 1981 upon the petitioner to show cause why the imp...
Jalyan Udyog Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-11-1991
Reported in: 1992(58)ELT33(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. Only question which was agitated by Mr. Dalal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners is the liability of the petitioners to pay additional duty payable under Section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 in respect of the ship imported for the purpose of breaking up. Few facts are required to be stated to appreciate the grievance of the learned counsel. Petitioners are a partnership firm and are carrying on business of purchasing old and unseaworth ships and dismantling and breaking the same. Petitioners purchased ship M.V. Dimities - K from Metal Scrap Trade Corporation Ltd. for the purpose of dismantling and breaking the same. On import of the ship the duty payable is under Customs Tariff Item 89.04 and standard rate of duty is 40%. Entry 89.04 reads as 'ships, boats, other vessels for breaking up.' 2. Mr. Dalal submits that the respondents are levying additional duty equal to excise duty under Section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Section 3(1) inter alia ...
Rico Gems Corporation Vs. Chief Controller of Imports and Exports
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-11-1991
Reported in: 1992(58)ELT390(Bom)
Sukumaran, J. 1. A diamond dealer has approached the Court with a precious contention based on promissory estoppel. The Court has to assess its lustre and test its structure. 2. Mahindra T. Mehta had obtained replenishment licence Exhibit 'A' dated 17-1-1990, authorising the import of diamonds unset and uncut along with ancillary articles as mentioned therein. The licence was later transferred to M/s. Mehta Gems, who in turn transferred it in favour of the petitioner under Exhibit B-1 dated 8-5-1991. Similar transfers were obtained from M/s. Sweta Enterprises, who had obtained Exhibit B-2 licence. 3. On 14-5-1991, the Controller of Imports and Exports sent a communication Exhibit 'E' directing the licencees to submit the REP Licences to the concerned REP Sections along with realisation of the export proceeds against REP Licences obtained by them for suitable endorsement to the effect that the entire export proceeds have been realised. This was to enable the authorities to consider the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »