Mumbai Court July 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.
Mazania Shri Navadurga Temple Vs. Govind Shablo Gavde and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-13-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)BomCR645
E.S. Da Silva, J.1 This Second Appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge, Panaji, dated 19th February, 1987, in Civil Appeal No. 128 of 1984 which has affirmed the Judgment of the Civil Judge, Senior Division of Bicholim dated 18th June, 1984 in Special Civil Suit No. 62 of 1974.2. The matter is relating to the Temple of Shri Navadurga at Bicholim which is the appellant. The said Temple of Navadurga has different affiliated Temples and one of them is the Temple of Mallikarjun situated at Pale village near Usgao. The plaintiffs who are the now respondents filed a suit for declaration that the Temple of Mallikarjun which is shown in the 'Compromisso' of Navadurga Temple as one of its affiliate Temples (filial) belonging to them in ownership and that they were the Mahajans of the Temple. A further prayer was also added to the effect that it should be declared that the Bye-laws the Navadurga Temple would not bind on the Zolmis family to which class th...
Raymonds Woollen Mills Ltd. Vs. C.S. Sonawane and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)BomCR567; (1993)ILLJ1162Bom
H.H. Kantharia, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner-employer impugns the judgment and order passed by the learned Member of the Industrial Court, Thane, on June 28, 1983 Appeal (IC) No. 12 of 1982. 2. The 1st respondent-employee (hereinafter referred to as 'the employee') was working with the petitioner as Machineman in Shearing Department, according to him, for more than one year and thus was a permanent employee. The petitioner terminated his service on January 9, 1976 all of a sudden without giving any notice or without following any procedure of law. The employee, therefore, addressed an approach letter date February 7, 1976 under Section 42(4) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 and having failed to get any redress filed Application No. 308 of 1976 in the Labour Court at Bombay under Section 78 read with Section 79 of the B.I.R. Act. His case was that the action on the part of the petitioner in terminating his services all of a sudden without following any procedur...
Vasant Ladoo Naik Vs. Kohinoor Mills No. 1 and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-1992
Reported in: [1992(65)FLR452]; (1993)ILLJ336Bom
1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the Petitioner inter alia, seeks to challenge refusal of backwages by the Labour Court in Application (LCB) No. 802 of 1978, decided on November 28, 1986, and also decision of the Industrial Court by which Appeal of the workman No. 106 of 1986 was partly allowed granting 20% of the backwages; whereas, the Petitioner was seeking full backwages as mentioned hereinabove. 2. The facts giving rise to this writ petition are as follows :- (a) The Petitioner-workman was in the permanent employment of Kohinoor Mills No. 1 Respondent No. 1 from 1968 as a coolie. At the relevant time the said Kohinoor Mills was the employer of the Petitioner in 1968; (b) Pursuant to the take over of the Kohinoor Mills on October 18, 1983, under the Textile Undertaking (Taking Over of Management) Act, 1983, the National Textile Corporation (hereafter 'N.T.C.') came on the scene, and accordingly the National Textile Corporation is the 2nd Respondent i...
Chandrabhushan Prasad Purushottam Prasad Mishra Vs. Hercules Hoists Lt ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-1992
Reported in: (1992)94BOMLR309
B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. This writ petition, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, impugns an Award, dated 29th August, 1985, made by the 4th Labour Court, Bombay, in Reference (IDA) No. 437 of 1983, under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The first Respondent is a Company engaged in the manufacture and sale of Travelling Trolleys, Electric Hoists, Cranes and other allied equipments. The first Respondent has a factory at Mulund, Bombay, where it employees about 250 employees. The Petitioner was in the employment of the first Respondent as an Engineer from 27th January, 1978, till he was dismissed from service with effect from 16th March, 1982, and his last drawn wages were Rs. 1,200 per month.3. The Petitioner was served with a Charge-sheet-cum-suspension order, dated 19th October, 1981, in which it was alleged against him that around 7th October, 1981, it had been noticed that the Petitioner had started playin...
Bal Kalyani and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Bom10
ORDERK. Sukumaran, J. 1. What the case is about:Malabar Hill of Bombay is well-known all over the world and for very long time. Bombay's general transformation into a nineteenth century urban metropolis did not spoil it much. A guide-book of 1865 remarks : 'The drive from Malabur Hill to Chowpatty along the foot of the cliffs is very pretty. The steep banks are covered with foliage....' Even by 1982, that area, by and large, preserved us earlier form. That was how someone who had taken pains to study the history and geography of Bombay felt. He stated :'Today that, atleast, has not changed. There is still a shanty-town there, clinging tenaciously to some of the most valuable land in the world....'.(See, Gillian Tindall -- 'City of gold', 1982, page 243)2. This litigation concerns that most valuable land. 'Rocky Hill' is an enclave in Malabar Hill. Some area is occupied by the flats constructed therein. They are inhabited by Judges and Ministers, mostly by Judges. The land has been in p...
Vysya Bank Ltd. Vs. Official Liquidator, Shreeniwas Cotton Mills Ltd. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-1992
Reported in: (1992)94BOMLR303; [1995]84CompCas493(Bom); 1992(2)MhLj1239
N.D. Vyas J.1. This appeal arises out of the judgment of the learned single judge dated June 14, 1989, in Company Application No. 366 of 1988 whereby the appellants had applied for leave under section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for continuing the suit filed by them, inter alia, against Shreeniwas Cotton Mills Ltd., the company in liquidation. By the judgment under appeal, the said application was dismissed and hence the present appeal. 2. Is the obtaining of leave under section 442 of the Companies Act, a condition precedent to filing of a suit Can such leave be granted ex post facto Does failure to obtain leave entail dismissal of the suit and whether as regards limitation the suit instituted without leave is to be regarded ineffective until leave is granted Such are the questions we are required to answer in this appeal. 3. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are as follows : On July 25, 1984, the company was ordered...
Dry Chillies Brokers Association and anr. Vs. Dnyaneshwar Chamat and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)BomCR131; (1992)94BOMLR268
G.D. Patil, J.1. The original plaintiffs have challenged the order dated 5-5-1990, passed below Ex. 15 in C.A No. 367 of 1988 by the learned Additional District Judge, Nagpur.2. Ex. 15 was the application for dismissal of the appeal filed by the original defendants-non-applicants, under Order 43, Rule 1(r) C.P.C. wherein they had challenged the order passed by the trial Court under Order 39, Rule 2-A, C.P.C. on 2-8-1988, whereby the defendants were directed to be detained in the civil prison for a period of one month. The applicants-plaintiffs had contended in this application that no appeal lies under Order 43, Rule 1(r) C.P.C. as against the order passed under Order 39, Rule 2-A, C.P.C. and as such the appeal be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.3. The learned Additional District Judge, Nagpur, vide his order under challenge has, however, held that the appeal was maintainable. While coming to this conclusion, he has relied upon the provisions of the C.P.C. as amended in the year 197...
Shri Waman Gajanan Desai and Anr. Vs. Smt. Filomena D'sa and Ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-1992
Reported in: 1993(2)BomCR86
A.D. Mane, J.1. This writ petition arises from eviction proceeding instituted by the landlords-respondent Nos. 1 to 4 herein, against the tenants-petitioners, under the provisions of the Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968, (for short, 'the Act').2. One of the grounds in support of the eviction of the tenants from the suit premises as alleged by the respondents is that the petitioners are in arrears of monthly rent of Rs. 15/- per month over three months. The petitioners denied specifically the said ground and have stated that in the year 1970 the respondents came from Bombay and on their request, half of the house occupied by the petitioners was surrendered to them for their occupation and the rent was accordingly reduced from Rs. 15/- per month to Rs. 7.50 ps. per month.3. Pending the ejectment proceeding the respondents filed an application on January 22, 1979 before the Rent Controller, inter alia stating that the petitioners have failed to dep...
Baburao Venkatrao Kotgire and anr. Vs. Venkati Jaiwanta Thote and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-1992
Reported in: I(1993)ACC308
A.A. Halbe, J.1. First Appeal No. 35 of 1984 is filed by the owners of the offending vehicle being Truck No. MHB 8059; whereas First Appeal No. 6 of 1985 has been filed by the cleaner of this vehicle, who was found to be driving the above truck, which met with fatal accident involving the death of one Jaiwant, aged about 22 years.2. The appellants in both these appeals have been aggrieved by the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nahded, in Claim Petition No. 4/82. The grievance of the owners is that the Insurance Company Original Respondent no.3 has been wrongly absolved from the compensation liability and further that the claimants have been wrongly construed as legal representatives entitled to compensation, and also that the Tribunal landed on the wrong conclusion about the rashness and negligence on the part of the driver of their truck. Incidentally at that relevant time it was the cleaner who is the appellant in Appeal No. 6/85 was driving the truck. The grievan...
Lazor Colour Prints Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-08-1992
Reported in: 1993LC5(Bombay); 1992(62)ELT703(Bom)
K. Sukumaran J. 1. The petitioners deal in photographic and other processes. They entered into a contract for the import of QSS 703V-2 with accessories. The goods were actually imported only subsequent to 3-4-1986. That date is crucial as regards the levy of duty. A notification issued on that day, No. 230 of 1986, superseded the earlier notification, and higher rates were provided for thereunder. The petitioners have a contention that the making of the contract, and invoicing, were all done prior to 3-4-1986 and consequently, the Project Imports and duty concession as provided under Regulations of 1965 were available in respect of the goods. The respondents did not accept the above stand. The petitioners thereupon approached this Court for reliefs. 2. In its return, the respondents have stressed the coming into force the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and the replacement of Heading No. 72(A) by Heading No. 84.66 Section 15 of the Customs Act, 1962 provides the crucial dates with reference t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »