Mumbai Court December 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.
Bush India Ltd. Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-06-1991
Reported in: (1992)41ITD184(Mum.)
1 to 6. [These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.} 7. The next and the most important ground is that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in bringing to tax an amount of Rs. 65,84,906 under Section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act. The relevant facts are stated by the Assessing Officer in para-12 onwards.While scrutinizing the audited accounts of the company, the Assessing Officer noticed Note No. 25 of Schedule 18 constituting notes to the accounts which read as follows : 25. (a) Settlement of Excise Claims of Rs. 1.497 millions shown under 'Other Income' represents excise matters of earlier settled subsequent to the year end. (b) Sundry Creditors include Rs. 7.295 millions representing Excise collections/Excise refunds in respect of certain excise claims under dispute as at the year end. Adjustments thereto if any will be made when settled.In respect of the item of Rs. 72.95 lakhs, the following details were given :-2. Unpaid excise ...
Babarao Bhimrao Shisode Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-06-1991
Reported in: 1995(1)BomCR277
A.D. Mane, J.1. This first appeal is directed on behalf of the claimant against the order dated April 5, 1983 passed by the learned Assistant Judge, Parbhani, in Land Reference Case No. 34 of 1978.2. The appellant-claimant owns land bearing Survey Nos. 192/1,3,6,10 and Survey No. 200 in all admeasuring 5 Hectares 24 Acres situated in village Makani, Taluka Gangakhed, District Parbhani. The said land was acquired by the respondent-State Government for the purpose of submergence under Masoli project. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on March 4, 1974 whereas, the notification under section 6 of the Act was published on November 7, 1974. It appears that the possession of the land acquired was taken before the award could be passed. The Special Land Acquisition Officer by his award dated March 13, 1976 valued the land at the rate of Rs. 300/- per Are and granted compensation of Rs. 18,305.50 including solatium at the rate of 15% amounting to Rs. 2,395.50 t...
Brooke Bond India Ltd. Vs. U.B. Ltd. and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-05-1991
Reported in: 1992(2)BomCR429; [1994]79CompCas346(Bom)
B.N. Srikrishna, J. 1. By this notice of motion, the plaintiffs have sought an injunction to restrain the first defendants from in any manner disposing of, alienating, transferring, encumbering or selling 10,712 shares of the Company, known as 'Kissan Products Ltd.' and 3,600 equity shares of Merryweather Limited. There is also a prayer that the first defendant company be directed to carry out certain acts as detailed in prayer (c), pending the hearing and final disposal of the suit. The suit is for specific performance of an agreement dated July 31, 1991, between the plaintiffs and the first defendants. 2. The first defendants hold 10,712 equity shares of the face value of Rs. 100 each, comprising 67% of the paid-up and subscribed capital of Kissan Products Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the KPL') and 3,600 equity shares of the face value of Rs. 100 each, comprising 90% of the paid-up equity share capital of Merryweather Limited (hereinafter called 'the MW'). The balance of 400 equ...
Kanchanmala Vijaysing Shirke and ors. Vs. Government of Maharashtra an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-05-1991
Reported in: 1993ACJ607; 1991(4)BomCR346; (1992)94BOMLR445
P.S. Patankar, J.1. The judgment and order passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ratnagiri is under challenge in these Appeals. First Appeal No. 890 of 1984 has been filed by the original claimants challenging dismissal of their claim against original Opponent Nos. 1 to 3 and claiming enhancement of compensation. first Appeal No. 147 of 1985 has been filed by the original Opponent No. 4 holding him liable for payment of compensation. Both these appeals involve common questions of law and facts and, therefore, can be conveniently decided by this common judgment. The reference to parties hereafter shall be made with reference to First Appeal No. 890 of 1984.2. The Civil Application No. 1935 of 1987 dated 3-1-1985 has been filed for bringing on record the judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ratnagiri in Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 1981 by which the respondent No. 4 (original Opponent No. 4) came to be acquitted of charges under section 279, 304-A of IPC and...
Prabhakar Yeshwant Ranade Vs. Gajanan Narayan Adivarekar Since Decease ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-05-1991
Reported in: 1991(4)BomCR551; (1992)94BOMLR576
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. This writ petition raises an issue of some importance relating to the interpretation of Order XVIII, Rule 17-A of the Code of Civil Procedure. It is contended by the petitioner herein, that the two orders passed by the Court of Small Causes, the first of them dated 16-2-1983 and the second of them dated 8-4-1983 are liable to be set aside. The facts that are material for the purposes of the determination of this petition are briefly recounted below:2. The present petitioner is the landlord in respect of a building known as 'Ranade Prasad Niketan' situated at Lady Hardings Road, Mahim, Bombay. It is contended that one Gajanan Narayan Adivarekar was the monthly tenant in respect of Room No. 1 in the building. The present petitioner became the owner of the building in the year 1966. It is alleged the respondent No. 1 (since deceased) was the original tenant in respect of the said room and furthermore, that he was in arrears of rent from 1-8-1970. The further allegation...
Ronald Lawrence Pereira Vs. Flory Pereira and Benny Gonsalves
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-05-1991
Reported in: II(1994)DMC618
I.G. Shah, J.1. The Petitioner, who is a husband of the Respondent has filed this Petition under Section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act to claim dissolution of the marriage and Rs. 8,000/- by way of damages from the co-respondent.2. Both the respondent and the co-respondent though duly served, are absent and have not participated in the proceedings.3. The Petitioner examined himself and has deposed that his marriage with the respondent took place on 15th November, 1969, as per Christian rites. He deposed that the respondent is also Christian. He produced in support of his contention an extract of the Marriage Certificate issued by the Church. In view of this, the Petitioner is able to establish that he is legally married husband of the Respondent. He also further deposed that after residing with the Respondent after their marriage four issues were born to them. The eldest daughter, however, is married and there are two other daughters and the son who are minors. He also deposed that in A...
Gokuldas Jamnadas (Since Deceased by His Heirs) Vs. Ahamed Miya Sarole ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-05-1991
Reported in: (1992)94BOMLR327
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. By this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have impugned decree for possession dated 27th June, 1979 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division Thane, in Regular Civil Suit No. 266 of 1975 as also the judgment and decree dated 23rd January 1981 passed by the learned IInd Extra Assistant Judge, Thane, in Civil Appeal No. 152 of 1979.2. The principal question which arises for consideration of the Court in this petition is as to whether Section 12(3)(a) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), as it stood at the material time, was rightly invoked by the plaintiff-landlord.3. The crucial facts which are required to be stated for disposal of this petition are as under:(a) The suit premises consist of rooms Nos. 1 and 2 in a chawl/house bearing No. 270 situate at Ward No. 2 within, the limits of Kalwa Gram Panchayat, Thane. Shri Gokuldas Jamnadas was the te...
Kanchanmala Vijaysing Shirke and ors. Vs. Govt. of Maharashtra and ors ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-05-1991
Reported in: 2(1993)ACC552
P.S. Patankar, J.1. The judgment and order passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Ratangiri, is under challenge in these appeals. First Appeal No. 890 of 1984 has been filed by the original claimants challenging dismissal of their claim against original opponent Nos. 1 to 3 and claiming enhancement of compensation. First Appeal No. 147 of 1985 has been filed by the original opponent No. 4 holding him liable for payment of compensation. Both these appeals involve common questions of law and facts and, therefore, can be conveniently decided by this common judgment. The reference to parties hereafter shall be made with reference to First Appeal No. 890 of 1984.2. The Civil Application No. 135 of 1987 dated 3.1.1985 has been filed for bringing on record the judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ratnagiri, in Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 1981 by which the respondent No. 4 (original opponent No. 4) came to be acquitted of charges Under Sections 279, 304-A of Indian...
Ganikhan Vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-1991
Reported in: (1993)ILLJ62Bom
ORDER1. The petitioner was working as a Driver with the respondent Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation at its Bhandara Division at Bhandara under the Divisional Controller. It was alleged against him that on Feb. 23, 1975, while on duty he committed theft of five litres of diesel. He was, therefore, charge-sheeted on April 12, 1975 that he committed misconduct amounting to fraud, dishonesty, misappropriation and theft of the property of the respondent Corporation. Thereafter a domestic enquiry was held against him, as a result of which he was dismissed from services on February 28, 1977. He raised on industrial dispute in the Labour Court at Nagpur. On the evidence adduced before him, the learned Judge of the Labour Court by an Award dated August 5, 1983 no suited him by rejecting the reference made to it under Section 10 and with Section 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act. Being aggrieved, the petitioner invoked the supervisory writ jurisdiction of this Court under Art. 227 of...
Krishnakant Durlabhbhai Vora Vs. Mathuradas R. Gandhi and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-1991
Reported in: 1992(2)BomCR489; (1992)94BOMLR1
P.D. Desai, C.J.1. The election for the posts of Chairman and Directors of Respondent No. 13 Bank were held on 29th April 1991. The result of the election was declared on 30th April, 1991. The appellant was the contestant for the post of Chairman and respondents No. 1 to 10 were amongst the contestants for the posts of Directors along with three other persons Respondent No. 1, hereinafter 'called 'the disputant filed a dispute under section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, in the Co-operative Court at Bombay, challenging the election of the Appellant and respondents No. 2 to 10. In the proceeding, the Disputant filed an interim application for the appointment of a Receiver / Commissioner to take charge of the papers to the disputed election, including the ballot papers, used and unused, ballot boxes, documents recording election results, counter-foils of ballot papers, Register of Members and papers containing specimen signatu...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »