Mumbai Court June 1991 Judgments
The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs. Piagelal Pannalal Talw ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-28-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Bom283; 1991(3)BomCR424; (1991)93BOMLR530; 1991(2)MhLj1235
1. This First Appeal raises an important point regarding exclusion of jurisdiction of Civil Court. The same can be appreciated in the light of following few facts:--2. The appellant herein was the plaintiff while the respondents were the defendants. The Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 were the ownersof a vacant plot of land bearing Cadastral Survey No. 656 of Mandvi Division situated at 138-140, Narayan Dhuru Street Nagdevi, Bombay. It seems that the Defendant No. 1 gave intimation to the plaintiff some time on or about 10th December, 1960 under S. 337 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 and expressed his desire to construct a building on the said plot of land. However, permission was not granted by the plaintiff as the said plot was reserved for public purpose under the Development Scheme which was prepared under the provisions of the Bombay Town Planning Act, 1954. Thereafter, the defendants I and 2 started constructing some movable wooden stalls on the said plot of land.3. The pla...
Tag this Judgment!Rajeev Bhatia Vs. Abdulla Mohmed Gani and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-28-1991
Reported in: 1991(3)BomCR46; 1992CriLJ2092
ORDER1. Issues of some interest as also of considerable importance arise in this criminal application, which are summarized as follows :- a) Whether it is open to an accused to pray for variation of the essential conditions on which he has been released on bail after the bail order has been availed of by him and a considerable period of time has elapsed. b) Whether the principles analogous to res judicata would be applicable in a case where certain conditions of a bail order passed by a subordinate Court have not been challenged before the High Court and only certain other parts of that order were appealed against and, consequently, whether the original order can thereafter be regarded as the subsisting order of the trial Court and consequently varied by the Sessions Court at the instance of the applicant. c) In a case where an accused has exercised an option of furnishing cash bail and desires to thereafter change over to the security of a surety, whether the Customs Authorities are...
Tag this Judgment!Jeramdas Punjabi Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-28-1991
Reported in: 1992(57)ELT36(Bom)
Pendse, J. 1. Rule returnable forthwith. Shri Shah waives service on behalf of the respondents. Heard counsel. 2. On February 26, 1991, the Officers of Air Intelligence Unit of Customs Air Collectorate, Sahar, intercepted the petitioner in the Transit Lounge. The petitioner had arrived from Frankfurt by Lufthansa flight. The petitioner was waiting in the Transit Lounge for boarding the flight of Cathe Pacific to Hongkong. The petitioner was questioned by the Officers as to whether the petitioner was carrying any foreign currency and on receiving an affirmative reply, the person of the petitioner was searched as well as the bag in his possession. A large foreign currency of equivalent value of Rs. 63,64,875/- was found on the person and in the bag of the petitioner. The Customs Officer enquired from the petitioner as to whether the petitioner had in possession any documentary evidence in support of the acquisition or possession of the foreign currency and the answer was in the negative....
Tag this Judgment!Bombay Oil Industries Ltd. and anr. Vs. Raj Oil Mills and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-28-1991
Reported in: 1992(2)BomCR68
S.M. Jhunjhunuwala, J.1. This Notice of Motion has been taken out by the plaintiffs for an order of injunction to restrain the defendants by themselves, their servants and agents, pending the hearing and final disposal of the suit, from in any manner---(i) using and/or offering for sale and/or exposing for sale and/or publishing without the plaintiff's licence the impugned label as shown in Exhibits 'F-1' and 'F-2' to the plaint so as to infringe the plaintiffs' copyright of the original artistic work as shown in Exhibits 'B' and 'C' to the plaint;(ii) using in relation to any coconut oil or any oil the impugned label as shown in Exhibits 'F-1' and 'F-2' to the plaint or any other deceptively similar label so as to infringe the plaintiffs' registered trade mark No. 363235, and (iii) using in relation to the coconut oil or any oil in impugned label as shown in Exhibits 'F-1' and 'F-2' to the Plaint or any other deceptively similar label so as to pass off or enable others to pass off the...
Tag this Judgment!Manguex Venetexa Xete Caroicar and ors. Vs. Custodian of the Branches ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-28-1991
Reported in: 1993(1)BomCR489
E.S. Da Silva, J.1. This Civil Revision is directed against the Order of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Mapusa, dated 16-3-1990, in Execution Application No. 45/87/A, whereby the objections raised by the petitioners/judgment-debtors (hereinafter called 'the petitioners') in the execution proceedings filed by the respondents/decree-holders (hereinafter called 'the respondents') to seek the enforcement of the judgment and decree of the trial Court dated 19-6-1964 were negativated and dismissed.2. In a suit filed by the respondents against the late parents of the petitioners in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panaji, still during the pendency of the Portuguese law, being Accao Ordinaria No. 12 of 1963, for the recovery of the amount loaned to them by the erstwhile Banco Nacional Ultramarino by deed dated 17-12-1956 Escritoire do aperture de credit a contact corrente) a decree was secured by the respondents in the following terms:'As a result, the suit succeeds. The d...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Central Excise Vs. Reunion Engg. Co.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-27-1991
Reported in: (1994)(69)ELT605Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal filed by the Department is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. V-2 (85) (CETA) 1664/88 dated 26-9-1988 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, setting aside the Order-in-Original No. V(85)l8-80/87/940 dated 19-4-1988 passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Division-I, Thane, and allowing the Respondents' claim for refund holding the same within the limitation as prescribed under Section 11B of the CESA.2. The Respondents herein filed the classification list No. 2/86-87 effective from 1-4-1986 claiming the duty at Nil rate upto the value limit of Rs. 15.00 lacs and later they claimed the MODVAT credit, on 9-4-1986 but cleared the goods on payment of duty at full rate of 15% during the period from 9-4-1986 to 30-4-1986 and then claimed refund by filing two refund claims one for Rs. 7060.56 for the period from 1-4-1986 to 8-4-1986 and another for Rs. 14,345/-covering the period from 9-4-1986 to 30-4-1986. The same were rejected by the...
Tag this Judgment!New Jacks Printing Works (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-27-1991
Reported in: (1992)(39)LC122Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No.PPM-244/BI-128/88 dated 23.9.1988 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, confirming the Order-in-Original No. V(68) 181/86/1217 dt. 13.2.1987 passed by the Asstt. Collector of Central Excise, Div II, Bombay I, rejecting the appellants claim of refund as time barred.2. When the matter was called out for hearing the Registry brought to my notice a letter dated 21.6.1991 requesting the Tribunal to decide the appeal on merits in their absence.4. From the records, it appears that the refund claim is based on the duty paid under 2 Gate Passes one dated 27.5.1982 and another dated 2.7.1982. The refund claim was filed on 10.2.1986 and the exemption from the applicability of Section 11A of the CESA was claimed on the ground that there existed a letter of protest dated 8.6.1982. The letter produced has been accepted as proper but the authority below have rejected the claim in relation to the duty paid on 27.5.1982 a...
Tag this Judgment!Plastics Converters Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-27-1991
Reported in: (1995)(76)ELT167Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No.R-797/B-n-521/87/12557, dated 19-8-1988 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, confirming the Order-in-Original No.V-l8II(18) 67/85 dated 30-9-1986 passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Dv. VIII, Bombay II rejecting part of the appellants claim for refund on the ground that they had failed to produce the triplicate copy of the GP-1 for the said period.2. Shri D.D. Gwalani, the Ld Advocate on behalf of the appellants submitted that Section 11B of the CESA does not provide for production of triplicate copy of the Gate Pass No. 1 and that production is called for as per the executive instructions just with a view to curb double refund of duty amount. He submitted that the appellants are prepared to furnish security by way of bank guarantee. He further submitted that except GP-ls, all the relevant documents in relation to the claim are with the department and by way of safety measure the Departm...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Hawabi Sayed Arif Sayed Hanif Vs. L. Hmingliana, Secretary (Preve ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-27-1991
Reported in: (1991)93BOMLR673; 1992CriLJ437; 1992(1)MhLj348
Mrs. Sujata Manohar, J.1. The petitioner is the wife of one Sayed Arif Sayed Hanif against whom an order of detention has been issued u/S. 3(1) of the conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the 'COFEPOSA Act') on 23rd October 1990 by the Secretary (Preventive Detention, Government of Maharashtra, Home Department. This order has been issued against the detenu in order to prevent him from smuggling goods. 2. In the Grounds of Detention, it is stated that in pursuance of intelligence collected by the Officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, surveillance was maintained by the Officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence in the sea off Karwar for a suspected Arab Dhow carrying silver being smuggled into India. On 25-9-1990 these officers sighted the Arab Dhow about 3 to 5 nautical miles away from the Karwar harbour. It was stopped. And on inspection, the officers found 150 packages containing contraban...
Tag this Judgment!Nirlon Synthetic Fibres and Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-27-1991
Reported in: 1991LC597(Bombay)
M.L. Pendse, J.1. The petitioners are Public Limited Company and inter alia manufacture polyester and nylon yarn in their factory. The petitioners import textile spinning-grade raw material called Polyester chips for the purpose of manufacturing polyester yarn. The petitioners imported textile spinning-grade raw material and the bills of entry were filed in July, 1970. The petitioners were called upon to pay import duty of Rs. 4,19,937/- at 100% of the CIF value under Tariff Item 82(3)(a) of the Indian Customs Tariff, 1970. The petitioners were also required to pay countervailing duty and surcharge of Rs. 78,406.20 at the rate of Rs. 1.80 per Kg. under section 2A of the Indian Tariff Act, 1934 and Entry 15A of Schedule 1 of the Central Excises and Salt Act read with notifications issued by the Government from time to time. The petitioners paid the duty under protest and thereafter filed applications for refund of excess duty. The refund applications were filed on August 14, 1970 and Se...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »