Mumbai Court December 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.
Narkeshari Prakashan Ltd. Vs. Nagpur Press Kamghar Sangh and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-09-1992
Reported in: 1993(3)BomCR565; [1994(68)FLR462]; (1994)IILLJ530Bom
H.W. Dhabe, J.1. These two LPAs arise out of the common judgment rendered bv the learned Sinele Judge in two writ petitions preferred by the two trade unions who had on behalf of the employees, sought to be retrenched by the appellant challenged in the writ petitions the order passed by the Secretary (Labour), Industries, Energy and Labour Department, dated July 24, 1991 granting permission to Narkeshari Prakashan Limited which runs daily newspaper. 'Tarun Bharat', to retrench 19 workmen subject to the conditions laid down in the said order dated July 24, 1991.2. The facts are that the appellant which is a Public Limited Company registered under the Companies Act purchased the daily newspaper 'Tarun Bharat' in or about 1949. Three to four years thereafter, it launched Hindi daily by name 'Yugdharm'. The work of composing of these two newspapers was done at that time by the hand compositors engaged by the appellant. In the year 1963-64, the appellant purchased and installed three Mono C...
State Bank of India Vs. Vishwanath and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-1992
Reported in: [1994]80CompCas9(Bom)
B.U. Wahane, J.1. The only question raised in this appeal is whether the creditor bank can levy the guarantee fees or charges from the borrower and debit such amount to the account of the borrower 2. Before dealing with the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant, it is necessary to give some facts. The appellant/plaintiff-bank had advanced an agricultural term loan of Rs. 45,600 to respondent No. 1/defendant No. 1, Vishwanath S/o. Motiram Lothe, on May 5, 1982, for purchase of the tractor. Respondent No. 1 had executed an agreement of hypothecation and agreed to the terms and conditions contained in the said agreement. Respondent No. 2/defendant No. 2 is the guarantor, who executed the deed of guarantee and thereby guaranteed the repayment of the loan advanced by the plaintiff-bank to defendant No. 1. Defendant No. 1 agreed to pay interest at 12.5% per annum minimum 4% below the State Bank of India advance rate. The loan amount was to be repaid in instalments of Rs. 6,51...
Ramesh Rama Ubale and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-1992
Reported in: I(1993)DMC494
H.D. Patel, J.1. The Judgment of the Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 146 of 1985 decided on 27th March. 1986 is impugned in this appeal.2. Appellant No. 1, Ramesh, who was original accused No. 1, and Appellant No. 2, Janabai are the son and mother who were charged for having committed offences punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 and Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code for having abetted the commission of suicide on account of cruelty caused to her by the Appellants.3. The case of the prosecution was that the deceased Ranjana was the daughter of Ramchandra Punja Gore (P.W.I) of Igatpuri. Ranjana was married to Accused No. 1 some eleven months prior to the incident. She used to visit her parents house and once she was got medically treated by her parents. After four days of treatment, accused Ramesh came to the house of his in-laws in a drunken state and after quarrelling with them took away his wife, to his house. Further case of the prosecution was that thereafter o...
State of Maharashtra and Others Vs. Suresh Rameshwardas Lohiya
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)BomCR337; 1993CriLJ1557; 1993(1)MhLj108
A.A. Desai, J. 1. This petition raises an intricate and somewhat important question relating to the present environmental condition as to whether the manmade products of bamboo, namely, matting are within the definition of 'forest produce' as provided under sub-sec. (4) of S. 2 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The precise facts leading to this question are as thus :- On 30-7-1986 at midnight Truck No. MTG 8987 of respondent's brother Suresh Lohiya was intercepted by the forest officers. They having noticed the excess quantity of bamboo matting than those mentioned in a transit pass, seized the vehicle with the goods. After certain formality as provided under the Act, the forest officer confiscated the matting. In revision under S. 61C of the Act, the Conservator modified the order and confiscated matting only to the extent 1240. In appeal, under S. 61D, the Additional Sessions Judge reached a conclusion that the bamboo mattings are not the fores...
S.K. Palaniappah Kandaiswami Gonder and anr. Vs. Superintending Engine ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-1992
Reported in: 1994ACJ231; 1993(1)BomCR350
A.V. Savant, J.1. This is an Appeal by original opponents Nos. 2 and 3 viz. the owner of the truck and the insurer thereof against whom there is an order in favour of the first respondent (original claimant) awarding Rs. 42,000/- by way of compensation with future interests at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of application, that is to say from 2nd July 1983 till the realisation alongwith the costs of the application. This order was passed on 19th October 1984 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sangli, in Motor Accident Claim No. 40 of 1983. The relevant facts may be stated as under:2. On 3rd January, 1983 the officers of the Maharashtra State Electricity Board (for short, the M.S.E.B.') were proceeding in an ambassador car, belonging to the M.S.E.B., bearing registration No. MTT 6431 from Karad to Kolhapur, that is to say from North to South. At the same time, that is to say at about 1.00 p.m., the truck belonging to the first appellant bearing registration No. CAA 2299 was...
S.K. Palaniappah Kandaiswami Gonder and anr. Vs. Superintending Engine ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-1992
Reported in: I(1992)ACC349
A.V. Savant, J.1. This is an appeal by original opponent Nos. 2 and 3, viz., tae owner of the truck and the insurer thereof against whom there is an order in favour of the first respondent (original claimant) awarding Rs. 42,000/- by way of compensation with future interest at the rate of 10 per cent per annum from the date of application, that is to say, from 2.7.1983 till the realisation along with the costs of the application. This order was passed on 19.10.1984 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sangli, in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 40 of 1983. The relevant facts may be stated as under:2. On 3.1.1983 the officers of the Maharashtra State Electricity Board (for short, 'the M.S.E.B.') were proceeding in an Ambassador car, belonging to the M.S.E.B., bearing registration No. MTI 6431 from Karad to Kolhapur, that is to say, from north to south. At the same time, that is to say, at about 1 P.M., the truck belonging to the first appellant bearing registration No. CAA 2299 was comi...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hico Products (P.) Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-03-1992
Reported in: [1993]201ITR575(Bom); 1991(1)MhLj213
DR. B.P. Saraf, J. 1. Under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred by the Income-tax Appellant Tribunal for our opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that in the case of employee-directors, the provisions of section 40A(5)(a) and the ceiling or limit contemplated therein under clause (c) would not apply but the ceiling of Rs. 72,000 contained in the proviso to section 40A(5)(a) read with section 40(c) would be applicable and consequently in vacating the Commissioner's order under section 263 ?' 2. It is stated at the Bar that a similar question has already been decided in favour of the assessee in the assessee's own case in I. T. R. No. 20 of 1978, CIT v. Hico Products Pvt. Ltd. (No. 1) : [1993]201ITR567(Bom) by the judgment dated November 17, 1992. Following the same, the question is answered accordingly in favour of the assessee. 3. N...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Standard Batteries Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-03-1992
Reported in: [1993]201ITR977(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), made at the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion : 'Where, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that mining safety lamps were mining machinery within the meaning of item No. (4) of the Sixth Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961, and allowing the assessee-company relief under section 80-I of the said Act in respect of its income arising from the manufacture of miner's cap lamp ?' 2. The assessee is a public limited company. The business of the assessee is to manufacture automobile ancillaries, equipments for generation of electricity, etc. The relevant assessment year is 1972-73. The controversy relates to disallowance of a part of claim of the assessee under section 80-I of the Act. In its original return, the assessee claimed relief under sec...
Standard Batteries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-03-1992
Reported in: [1994]205ITR209(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J. 1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, made at the instance of the assessee, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to claim development rebate at higher percentage on items, viz., miners' safety cap lamps, mining batteries and components when these items cannot be said to be major items of specialised equipment used in 'mining machinery' ?' 2. The assessee is a public limited company and its business is to manufacture automobile ancillaries, equipment for generation of electricity, etc. The assessment year involved in this reference is 1971-72, the relevant accounting year being the year ended on June 30, 1970. The dispute this case relates to disallowance of the claim for development rebate a higher rate in respect of machinery used in manufacture of miners' safety cap lamps, mining ...
Union of India Vs. Kavita Exports Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-03-1992
Reported in: 1993LC123(Bombay); 1993(64)ELT185(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. The respondent No. 1 is a Company and is exporter of stainless steel castings. On March 19, 1984, the respondents were issued two REP licences of the value of Rs. 1,54,400/- and Rs. 1,65,600/- respectively. The licences were valid for a period of 12 months from the date of issue and the policy then prevalent permitted an additional grace period of two months. The respondent No. 1, in pursuance of the grant of licences, opened letter of credit on December 13, 1984 and the credit were furnished by Laxmi Bank. The Bank was in financial difficulty and for the period between April 27, 1985 and August 23, 1985, the Reserve Bank declared a moratorium. The Bank thereupon informed foreign supplier on May 16, 1985 the Bank's inability to honour letter of credit. The respondent No. 1 thereupon requested the appellants to revalidate the licences for a further period. The request was not granted on the ground that there is no power to revalidate the licences. The refusal to revalidate ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »