Mumbai Court August 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.
Hotel Dove Bird Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-20-1992
Reported in: (1999)IIILLJ1348Bom
V.V. Kamat, J.1. The petitioners M/s. Hotel Dove Bird have filed this petition making out the grievance with regard to the order (Exh. 'B'), which is in the nature of a demand under the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 passed by the respondent No. 7--Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Maharashtra and Goa. By the demand dated July 24, 1987, the respondent No.2 claimed Rs. 1,31,855-80. In the petition and submissions made before me by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners have paid and were paid the contribution and accordingly paid Rs. 37,076-85 during the period in question. The period in question is from August 1, 1982 till the date of the notice of demand.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, viz. Shri Pathak for the petitioners and Shri Master for all the respondents.3. Taking into consideration the submission that is made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the order is passed without...
Rajendra Jainarayan Sharma Vs. R.P. Patankar, Asstt. Collector of Cust ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)BomCR30; 1993CriLJ1550
ORDER1. This purports to be a petition under sections 482 and 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - herein after referred to as 'the Code'. 2. Petitioner was arraigned along with another person for offences punishable under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (the Act). Petitioner was the first accused and the other person was accused No. 2. Shortly stated, the case against them was that on 11-2-1992 at about 1.45 p.m. petitioner and accused No. 2 were going by a scooter, with accused No. 2 being on the driver's seat and petitioner on the pillion seat. They were stopped by the officers of the 1st respondent and searched. At the foot of the driver were two plastic bags which contained a sum of Rs. 5,99,900/- in currency notes. A search of the person of the petitioner was taken and therein was found a match box containing three Mandrex Tablets and a sticker having on it a number and some particulars of an Airway bill. Petitioner and accused No. 2 were taken to the N...
Dr. Narendra Vidyadhar Sardesai Vs. Shaila
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-1992
Reported in: II(1992)DMC598
S.G. Mutalik J.1. By the impugned order passed below Ex. 7,in Hindu Marriage Petition (HMP) No. 117/1990, the 4th Joint Civil Judge,Senior Division, awarded maintenance pendente lite to the respondent-wife atthe rate of Rs. 3000/- per month from the date of the application and Rs. 3000/-as costs of the litigation. Both the parties have challenged the said impugnedorder by filing Civil Revision Application No. 1206 of 1991 (by the husbaad) original petitioner and Cr.A. No. 149 of 1992 (by the wife)- original respondent. While deciding both these matters, the original petitioner is styled asthe applicant while original respondent No. is styled as the non-applicant.2. It is an admitted fact that the marriage between the parties tookplace on 15th December. 1967 and the parties have a son by name Pranav aged about 22 years and daughter Miss Gouri aged about 21 years (vide theiraffidavits pages 63 and 69). For some years everything was going on smoothly between the parties. The applicant is ...
Subhash Ramchandra Wadekar Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-18-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Bom64
ORDER1. An interesting and important question of law arises in this proceeding for consideration of the Court as to the presumed date of death of a person where the presumption of death on expiry of 7 years absence applies and the person concerned is not heard of for last more than 7 years. The question arising before the Court is of some significance as the Estate Duty Act, 1953 was repealed from 1st April, 1985, save and exceptin respect of liability to pay estate duty where the deceased had died prior to the date.2. The relevant facts having bearing on the above referred question are as under:--(a) The petitioner is the son of Shri Ramchandra Arjun Wadekar. The said Ramchandra left home on 9th January, 1984 and was not heard of by the petitioner and the other relatives since then. A missing report was filed by petitioner with the police authorities. Newspaper advertisements were issued announcing reward to the informant for tracing the whereabouts of the said Ramchandra. All efforts...
M/S. Elbros Textiles Limited, Judgment Creditors Vs. Surendrakumar Har ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-18-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Bom381
ORDER1. M/s. Elbros Textiles Limited has filed this petition for adjudication of Surendrakumar Harkishor Jain as an Insolvent on the ground that the said debtor has failed to comply with the Insolvency notice No.N/122/88 dated 6th July, 1988.2. This petition raises two questions of law. The said questions of law are formulated as under:---(1) Whether one of the joint decree-holder is entitled to file an Insolvency petition for adjudication of the debtor as an Insolvent orwhether all the decree-holders must necessarily join in the petition as petitioners? (2) Whether the Insolvency petition based on non-compliance of Insolvency notice calling upon the debtor to pay the decretal debt in pursuance of a decree passed by the foreign Court or furnish security in respect thereof is not maintainable in case of nonresident creditor in absence of prior permission of Reserve Bank of India?In my opinion, the insolvency petition can be filed by one of the joint creditors on principles anologous to ...
Century Spinning and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-18-1992
Reported in: 1993(67)ELT224(Bom)
Puranik, J.1. The 1st petitioner company owns a factory known as Century Rayon situated at Shahad near Kalyan. The 2nd petitioner is the principal officer and shareholder of the 1st petitioner company. The petitioner company, for brief, inter alia manufactures rayon tyre yarn. The said rayon tyre yarn is then arranged in parallel rows length-wise and loosely held together by cotton threads running breadth-wise to hold them in the said position. This arrangement is popularly known as warp sheet or tyre cord warp sheet. According to the petitioners, the said warp sheet is classifiable under Tariff Item No. 22 or in the alternative under Tariff Item No. 18. 2. Prior to 1st March 1975, the petitioner company paid excise duty on rayon tyre yarn which was manufactured, as aforesaid, by holding the rayon tyre yarn in parallel length-wise arrangement held together with loose cotton threads breadth-wise. The respondent department accepted the petitioners' contention and the classification made ...
G.J. Kanga and anr. Vs. S.S. Basha
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-18-1992
Reported in: 1992(3)BomCR582; (1993)95BOMLR632
Ashok Agarwal, J.1. Whether the Municipal Commissioner can set aside an order passed by the Deputy Municipal Commissioner dropping action of demolition under section 351 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') is the question posed for my decision.2. The appellants are the original defendants who are the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay and its Administrator and the respondent is the original plaintiff. The present appeal seeks to challenge a judgment and order dated 17/21/22nd October, 1986 passed by His Honour Judge Shri R.J. Purandare in Notice of Motion No. 6232 dated 12th December, 1984 in Suit No. 7851 of 1984 whereby the Notice of Motion taken out by the plaintiff for interim injunction restraining the defendants from acting in pursuance of the decision of the Additional Municipal Commissioner dated 3rd December, 1984 and from demolishing the suit shop belonging to the plaintiff was made absolute. The shop in dispute is known as Bomb...
Re Surendrakumar Harkishor JaIn Vs. Elbros Textiles Limited
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-18-1992
Reported in: 1992(3)BomCR639; (1992)94BOMLR730
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. M/s. Elbros Textiles Limited has filed this petition for adjudication of Surendrakumar Harkishor Jain as an insolvent on the ground that the said debtor has, failed to comply with the Insolvency Notice No. N/122/88 dated 6th July, 1988.2. This petition raises two questions of law. The said questions of law are formulated as under :(1) Whether one of the joint decree holder is entitled to file an Insolvency petition for adjudication of the debtor as an Insolvent or whether all the decree holders must necessarily join in the petition as petitioners?(2) Whether the Insolvency petition based on non-compliance of Insolvency notice calling upon the debtor to pay the decretal debt in pursuance of a decree passed by the foreign Court or furnish security in respect thereof is not maintainable in case of non-resident creditor in absence of prior permission of Reserve Bank of India?In my opinion, the insolvency petition can be filed by one of the joint creditors on principles a...
Smt. Maria Tecla Goes Pereira Vs. Denzyl Lobo and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-18-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)BomCR679
E.S. Da Silva, J.1. This second appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Addl. District Judge, Panaji, dated 16th December, 1987 in Regular Civil Appeal No.5 of 1986 whereby he affirmed the judgment and decree of the learned Civil Judge J.D., Mapusa dated 30-11-1985 in Civil Suit No. 128/84. That was a suit for declaration, title and permanent injunction filed by the respondent No.1 (hereinafter called the respondent) against the appellant and the late respondent No. 2/P Pascoal Goes. It was partly decreed by the trial Court as a result of which the respondent was declared tenant of two rooms with a carpet area of 37 sq. metres in respect of a demolished building belonging to the appellant and entitled to possession of equal area in the new building erected in its place on rent to be determined as per the provisions of the Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 (hereinafter called the Act). An appeal filed by the appellant and the late r...
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. N. M. Mehta (Huf) (Also Assis ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-18-1992
Reported in: (1993)46TTJ(Mumbai)71
ORDERN. R. PRABHU, A.M. :There are appeals by the assessee and gross appeals by the Department. These appeals are taken up together and disposed of by a common order for the sake of convenience.2. We shall take the appeals by the assessee first for disposal. The grievance on these appeals is that the CIT(A) was in error in not granting interest under S. 214 of the IT Act, in respect of refund of excess advance tax paid by the assessee and arising as a result of the order passed by the ITO under S. 155(1) of the IT Act. We have heard the parties to the dispute. At the time of hearing, the counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Tata Chemicals reported in (1988) 169 ITR 314 . That was a case where advance tax paid was not taken into account when passing the regular assessment order. When the matter was brought to the notice of the ITO an order under S. 154 was passed by the ITO. As a result of this order, it was f...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »