Mumbai Court October 1992 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.
Smt. Anjanabai W/O Vivekanand Kothare and Others Vs. Smt. Jaswantibai ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-07-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Bom134; 1994(1)BomCR253; 1993(1)MhLj523
ORDERH. D. Patel, J. 1. The two judgments which are under challenge in the aforesaid two appeals arise from common evidence both documentary and oral led in the two cases before the learned trial Court. It will be convenient to dispose of these appeals by a common judgment. Both the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of accordingly.2. Civil Suit No. 177 of 1975 was filed by the three daughters of Durgaji Bhange, namely, Anjanabai, Bhimabai and Chindhabai for declaration and partition of Khasra Nos. 72, 73, 74/1 and 76/1 situated at Mouza Parsodi, Tq. and District Nagpur. It is alleged in the plaint that the said Durgaji died in the year 1962 leaving behind the three daughters who are the plaintiffs and five sons, namely, Ganashyam, Narayan, Shamrao, Sitaram and Ramdas -- the defendants Nos. 8 to 12. The plaintiffs are all married. After the death of Durgaji, the suit fields were inherited by the plaintiffs and defendants 8 to 12. It is further alleged in the plaint that...
Babu Magbul Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-07-1992
Reported in: 1993(3)BomCR309; 1993CriLJ2808; 1993(2)MhLj1118
1. A very unusual situation has arisen in this appeal. During the investigation, assistance of tracker-dog Kumar was made use of by the police and the bag and clothes of the accused were recovered with the assistance of this tracker dog, who also led the police to the house of the accused. The admissibility of this evidence and, more importantly, the evidentiary value of dog-tracking evidence has been seriously questioned and, therefore, requires to be examined and the issues decided. Investigating agencies often use the services of tracker-dogs and the question, therefore, arises as to how reliable is this class of evidence. The orthodox view was that though it is admissible, it is not of much utility and consequently, that it did not ordinarily have such weight. There has been considerable development of research and thinking on the subject and the modern trend is that such evidence is of an extremely high calibre. 2. Undoubtedly, evidence in criminal cases, and in particular ones wh...
Walchand and Co. Pvt. Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-07-1992
Reported in: (1993)95BOMLR62; [1993]204ITR146(Bom)
B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. This reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), pertaining to the assessment years 1958-59 to 1968-69, has been referred for the opinion of this court at the instance of the assessee. 2. The question referred for the opinion of this court are : 3. For the assessment year 1958-59 : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the sum of Rs. 3,058 has been rightly taxed as 'dividend' under the provisions of section 2(6A) (e) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the dividend earned from the trust-company was exempt under the provisions of sub-clause (iii) of section 2(6A)(e) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (3) If the answer to question No. 2 above is in the negative, is the said dividend exempt on the ground of double taxation ?' 4. Assessment years 1960-61 and 1961-62 : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of th...
Shri Francisco Almeida Vs. the Board of Trustees of the Port of Mormug ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-07-1992
Reported in: 1993(2)BomCR191
G.D. Kamat, J.1. Petitioner is a Shipchandler by occupation and according to him he used to obtain a licence for the business of Shipchandling at the Mormugao Harbour during the erstwhile Portuguese regime. Petitioner says that he last obtained a licence dated 27th March, 1968, issued by the Director of Civil Administration and Collector after liberation. According to him, by virtue of this licence dated 27th March, 1968 he is entitled to do Shipchandling Business at the Mormugao Harbour. He complains that on 15th November, 1977, the Security Staff of the Mormugao Port Trust stopped his entry and access to a vessel known as 'MUGUNGARA' on the ground that the petitioner has no valid licence as a Shipchandler. According to the petitioner, he brought to the notice of the Port Trust Authorities that the licence dated 27th March, 1968, granted to him by the Director of Civil Administration and Collector, was a valid licence by virtue of which he was entitled to carry on the business of Ship...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Protos Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1992
Reported in: [1994]207ITR831(Bom)
Smt. Sujata Manohar, J.1. This reference under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 pertains to the asst. yr. 1963-64. Two questions have been referred to us for decision at the instance of the CIT. These two questions are : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that provision for taxation and proposed dividend constituted reserve and should be included in computing the capital base under the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963 (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the excess book depreciation written off over depreciation allowance under the IT Act, of Rs. 52,567 should be included in the capital base under the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963 ?' 2. The relevant facts are as follows : For the purpose of determining super profits tax payable under the provisions of the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963, the ITO computed the capital of the respondent-company under the Second Schedule to ...
Kush S/O Dr. Damodar Jhunjhunwala Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1992
Reported in: 1994(3)BomCR532
H.W. Dhabe, J.1. Both these writ petitions can be disposed of by this common Judgment since they involve a common question of law.2. Turning first to the facts in Writ Petition No. 1614 of 1992, the petitioner therein appeared for the XIIth Standard Examination in March, 1991. However, according to him, since he was not expecting to secure good percentage of marks in Biology subject, he did not appear and thus failed in that subject. The petitioner thereafter appeared for the XIIth Standard Examination held in March, 1992 in the subjects of English, Physics, Chemistry and Biology because, according to Regulation 101 of the Maharashtra Secondary & Higher Secondary Education Board's Regulations, 1977, he was entitled to claim exemptions in certain subjects in which he had secured not less than 35 per cent of the maximum marks assigned to that subject. He was then declared to have passed in the said subjects in the said Examination. According to the petitioner, he obtained 71 per cent mar...
Ramdas Srinivas Nayak Vs. Abdul Rehman Antulay and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)BomCR185; (1993)95BOMLR75
V.P. Tipnis, J.1. What is the effect of the order of the Apex Court delivered by its judgment reported in : 1988CriLJ1661 , A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak & another, on the statements recorded by this Court in pursuance to the directions of the Apex Court passed on 16th February 1984 is the main question in this petition.2. We find it unnecessary to give details of the entire history of the prosecution which has given rise to the present petition. The present petitioner Shri Nayak prosecuted Shri A.R. Antulay as early as in the year 1981. There have been innumerable proceedings before different courts including the Apex Court. One of the proceedings relevant to the issue is the proceeding before the Apex Court which culminated in the decision reported in : 1984CriLJ613 R.S. Nayak v. A.R. Antulay. The aforesaid matter before the Supreme Court arose out of the order and decision of the learned Special Judge Shri R.B. Sule discharging the accused in the Special Case No. 24 of 1982 and Special...
Co-operative Bank Employees Union Vs. Yeshwant Sahakari Bank Ltd. and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-01-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)BomCR621; (1993)95BOMLR67; (1993)IIILLJ9Bom; 1992(2)MhLj1696
Srikrishna, J. 1. This writ petition has been placed before this Bench by the learned Chief Justice, pursuant to a recommendation made by a learned Single Judge of this Court (Kantharia, J.) by his Judgment dated July 1, 1991. The learned Judge (Kantharia, J.) found it difficult to agree with certain views expressed by another learned Single Judge of this Court (S. K. Desai, J.) in his Judgment in Misc. Petition No. 116 of 1974, with regard to the interpretation of Section 42(1) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the BIR Act'). The matter has, therefore, been referred to this Division Bench by the learned Chief Justice for deciding the interpretation of the said provision of law. 2. The facts, relevant for deciding the writ petition, are very simple, and nothing really turns upon the facts of the case. A statement was made at the Bar by Mr. Kochar, learned advocate for the writ petitioner, that the writ petition is being pursued only for settling the is...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Bhalchandra Vishnu Kelkar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-01-1992
Reported in: 1993ACJ1117
G.D. Kamat, J.1. The appellant is the insurer of a bus for transporting passengers, bearing No. GDT 2157. On 11.8.1984, at about 18 hours at Sirsaim, the mother of respondent Nos. 1 to 4 by name Laxmi Vishnu Kelkar met with an accident. It appears that she was on the pillion seat of a scooter bearing No. GDG 4510 driven by her son, Ajit V. Kelkar, who is the respondent No. 2, which was involved in that accident. The basis of filing claim petition by respondent Nos. 1 to 4 was that on the relevant date the bus GDT 2157 was being driven in a rash and negligent manner and that way dashed the scooter, with the result Laxmi fell down resulting in her death. Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 sought compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- in claim petition No. 96 of 1984. The learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, however, by the impugned award dated 29.2.1988, awarded a compensation of Rs. 25,000/- accrued with interest at the rate of 8 per cent from the date of the filing of the petition till payment. A furt...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›