Mumbai Court April 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.
D.M. Seth Vs. Ganeshnarayan R. Podar, Chairman, Shree Shakati Mills Lt ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-22-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ1899
1. Given the limited time at their disposal and the tremendous pressure generated by the need to hear and decide serious cases where matters of life and liberty are involved, the law Courts will have to, as of necessity, devise a machinery for purposes of defending from 'luxury litigation'. One such mode would be through the imposition of exemplary costs in cases where it is demonstrated that the litigation, though couched in the garb of a complaint and embellished with the veneer of grave legal injury; in substance turns out to be a lever for settling personal scores and demands that cannot otherwise be officially stated. This proceeding is one such. 2. Two businessmen, one the appellant before me, and the other, original accused No. 1, have carried on a violent litigation before the Court of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Don Quixote fashion for 5 1/2 long years between 2-11-1977 and 18-5-1983, when the trial Court at least acquitted the accused. Then came the turn o...
The Solapur Municipal Corporation Vs. Shivaji Works Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Bom213; 1993(1)MhLj80
ORDERPendse, J. 1. The respondents arc a company registered under the Companies Act and its office, factory and residential quarters were initially situated if the local limits of a revenue village known as Kumathe in North Solapur taluka of Solapur district. There was an existing village panchayat constituted under the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958 for revenue village Kumathe. The State Government by notification dated August 26, 1976 extended the limits of Solapur city covering the limits of Kumathe village with effect from September 1, 1977. The notification excluded the village from the village panchayat. Prior to September 1, 1976, the company was paying taxes to the village panchayat. On the area of the company being brought within the limits of Solapur city, the company was liable to pay municipal taxes to Solapur Municipal Corporation.2. Section 127 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 enables the Corporation to impose diverse taxes including property ...
Reckitt D Colman of India Limited Vs. Medicross Pharmaceuticals Privat ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1992
Reported in: 1992(3)BomCR408
N.D. Vyas, J.1. The present notice of motion is taken out by the plaintiffs for restraining the defendants from using their mark 'Medisprin' so as to infringe the plaintiffs' registered trademark 'Disprin' and so as to pass off their goods as the goods of the plaintiffs.2. Briefly, the facts giving rise to the present notice of motion are :The plaintiffs, manufacturers of medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations, are registered proprietors of a trademark 'Disprin' (word per se) in respect of analgestic preparations falling in Class 5 of the Schedule to the Trade Mark Rules. The defendants are also manufacturers of medical and pharmaceutical products and are proprietors of a trademark 'Medisprin Encotab' for the registration of which they have applied. According to the defendants, their product marketed under the said trademark is a coronary vasodilator and is a Schedule H drug which can be sold only by a licensed chemist and that too only against a medical prescription. According to t...
Girdharlal Lorinchand Puri Vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corpn. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-1992
Reported in: 1992(3)BomCR547; (1994)ILLJ770Bom
S.M. Daud, J.1. This is a suit for recovery of Rs. 95,000/-representing various sums allegedly due to the plaintiff whose services were terminated by the defendant No. 1 - hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation' - Vide an order passed on September 4, 1974.2. Plaintiff joined the service of the Corporation in the Legal Department and in the course of time rose to the rank of Legal Adviser. On October 8, 1969 the Corporation resolved to recall an order relieving the plaintiff, and, in place thereof, to hold a departmental enquiry against him. To give effect to this resolution, the Corporation on October 1.8, 1969 passed an order of suspension against the plaintiff. The suspension order gave a general description of the different acts of misconduct attributed to the plaintiff - one of them being taking of bribe or illegal gratification for doing or not doing an act in connection with the business of the Corporation covered by Item 21. The item referred to was to be found in the Disci...
Rajesh R. Kushalani and anr. Vs. Mahendra Prasad, Jt. Secretary Govt. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-1992
Reported in: 1992(3)BomCR272
N.P. Chapalgaonkar, J.1. Both these writ petitions challenge orders separately made in respect of Rajesh R. Khushalani and Tushar M. Shah under section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 ordering their detention and housing them at Central Prison, Bombay. Since the points of facts and law to be considered and raised in these petitions are common, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. It is alleged that M/s. Tushar Enterprises, M/s Aum Enterprises and M/s. Shah Enterprises had remitted abroad foreign exchange worth Rs. 5 crores with the help of some fake import documents presented to Union Bank of India. It is alleged that the business which was used as a cover was import of chemicals and besides some genuine transactions with the help of one Ram living in Hongkong a conspiracy was hatched and Ram was helping to prepare the said documents and send them to India. Four persons namely, Tushar Shah, who is said to be...
The State of Maharashtra Vs. Heptullal Tayaballi Dhorjiwalla
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-16-1992
Reported in: 1994(2)BomCR622; 1993CriLJ2913
1. The present appeal is filed by the State of Maharashtra seeking to impugn the judgment and order dated 13th June, 1984 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 5th Court, Dadar. Bombay, in Criminal Case No. 203/P/1984. 2. By the impugned order the learned Magistrate was pleased to acquit the respondent who was original accused No. 1 and his son Husefa, who was accused No. 2 for an offence under section 25 of the Indian Telegraph Act 1885 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Both the accused were charged under the aforesaid sections for having between 4th October, 1982 and 7th January, 1983 tempered with the telephone connection of PW 2, Rajabali Yusufali Rajkotwalla and PW 4 Yusuf Ismail Jarwala and connected their telephone to the telephone of the accused and committed theft of telephone calls which resulted in inflated bills being received by the aforesaid witnesses totalling to about Rs. 13,250/-. 4. The case of the prosecution may be summarised as ...
Bank of Baroda Vs. Perchem Industries and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-16-1992
Reported in: 1992(3)BomCR387; (1992)94BOMLR589
H.D. Patel, J.1. The aforesaid two appeals arise from a common judgment and, therefore, they are heard and disposed of together.2. Two Civil Suits were filed by the appellant Bank against the same set of respondents. They were registered as Special Civil Suit No. 167/79 and 168/79 . The first respondent in either of the two suits is a partnership firm dealing in the business of manufacturing aromatics and allied chemical having its factory at Hingna Road, Nagpur. The respondent Nos. 2 to 6 are the partners of the firm. The respondent No. 2 is the Managing Partner of the firm.3. The first respondent approached the appellant Bank for financial assistance upto a limit of one lakh for erection of the factory and for purchase and installation of machinery. After due scrutiny and verification of the requirements of the first respondent, sanctioned a term loan of Rs. 30,000/- against the equitable mortgage of the plot and building and Rs. 70,000/- against the hypothecation of machinery on 10-...
Sadashiv Durgaji Ambhore and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-16-1992
Reported in: (1992)94BOMLR758
H.D. Patel, J.1. The 12 petitioners have come forward to challenge the notifications issued by the Competent Authority under Sub-section(l) of Section 10 as well as Sub-section (3) of Section 10 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the U.L.C. Act'), Similarly the petitioners claim that a notification issued under Section 4 on 18.5.1989 and notification issued under Section 6 on 24.8.1989, both under the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the L.A. Act' ) be quashed and set aside.2. The petitioners, who are residents of Shiwangaon, Tahsil and District Nagpur, are the owners of agricultural lands, the details of which are to be found in the Schedule filed by the respondent No. 2. The said Schedule is accepted to be correct on behalf of the petitioners. The Schedule provides even other details which will be referred to at appropriate places. The petitioners allege that they are dependent on the income derived from those lands. The...
Ramesh Occhavlal Shah Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-13-1992
Reported in: 1992(3)BomCR521; 1992(62)ELT280(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J. 1. The question of law for determination in this batch of writ petitions and the relevant facts being identical all these writ petitions were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. 2. The petitioners in all these writ petitions are transferees of Import Replenishment (REP) Licences issued to manufacturer exporters against the registered contracts under the Import Policies for 1980-81, 1981-82 and 1982-83. Their contention is that they are entitled to import raw materials, components, consumables etc., required by them in terms of para 131(1) read with para 133 of the Import Policy, 1980-81 and para 138(1) read with para 140 of the Import Policies of 1981-82 and 1982-83, notwithstanding the fact that they themselves are not the manufacturer exporters in whose favour the REP Licences in question were issued. According to the petitioners, their cases are squarely governed by the decision of the Supreme Court in M/s. Os...
Janardhan J. Shinkre Vs. Mrs. Ana Francisca Fernandes and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-13-1992
Reported in: 1993(2)BomCR186
G.D. Kamat, J.1. This petition is styled as a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India which prays for a writ of certiorari or any other writ, direction or order for quashing the three orders made by respondents 2, 3 and 4 in proceedings No. MAM/MUND/REG-PRIOL/539/86. Factual matrix is necessary to be stated for better appreciation of the grievance involved in the present petition. Respondent No. 1 Ana Francisca Fernandes is the widow of Josa Fernandes. As soon as the Goa, Daman and Diu Mundkars (Protection from Eviction), Act, 1975 was brought into force some time on 12th March 1976 the late husband of the first respondent made an application before the Joint Mamlatdar, Ponda Taluka for registering him as a Mundkar in the register to be maintained by the Mamlatdar under the provisions of section 29 of that Act. This application was registered as Case No. JM/MUND/PRIOL/192/85. Though it appears that the application was made some time in the year 1978, nothing wa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »