Mumbai Court September 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.
Pradeep Kantilal Shroff Vs. Khorshed Kersap Aga and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-21-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)BomCR292; (1993)95BOMLR964
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. Shri Hansraj Jeewandas Thacker (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') died at Bombay on or about 5th day of December 1981. Shri Pradeep Kantilal Shroff has filed Petition No. 766 of 1984 for issue of letters of administration alongwith 'Will annexed' of the deceased being the document Exhibit 'A' to the petition. The document Exhibit 'A' to the petition is the document in dispute. One Nirupa Manilal Thacker has filed a Caveat opposing the grant sought for by the petitioner on various grounds. The following preliminary Issue is required to be considered and decided by the Court's :Preliminary Issue : Whether the document Exhibit 'A' to the petition is a Will?2. It is necessary to consider as to whether the document Exhibit 'A' to the petition is liable to be considered as 'Will' within the meaning of section 2(h) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. If the Court comes to the conclusion that the impugned document on it's construction does not amount to 'Will' withi...
Walvis Flour Mills Co. Pvt. Ltd., in Re.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-1992
Reported in: [1993]76CompCas376(Bom)
G.D. Kamat J.1. This petition seeks sanction under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, for a scheme of amalgamation of five companies. The petitioner - company is styled as Walvis Flour Mills Co. Pvt. Ltd. It may be made clear at this stage itself that Prosperity Holdings Private Limited., Messrs. Alsales Private Limited, Messrs. Resourceful Investments Private Limited and Messrs. Invaluable Investments Private Limited have been already amalgamated with Messrs. Sir Mathuradas Vissanji Foundation as transferee company by virtue of the order dated June 11, 1992, by a learned single judge at Bombay, in Company Private Limited, could not join in that petition at Bombay, in Company Petition No. 708 of 1991, connected with Company Application No. 347 of 1991. The fifth company, namely, Messrs. Walvis Flour Mills Company Private Limited, could not join in that petition at Bombay because that company has its registered office situated within the State of Goa and, therefore, this pe...
In the Matter of Reference Made by H.S. Ghare, Additional Sessions Jud ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ1573; 1993(1)MhLj827
Kurdukar, J. 1. The Principal Judge, Bombay City Civil Court and Sessions Judge, Bombay, has forwarded this reference made by Shri H. S. Ghare, Additional Sessions Judge, Bombay, under S. 395(1) and/or S. 395(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code read with Chapter XVII, para 10 of the High Court Criminal Manual. The order of reference is dated 6th April, 1992 (Annexure A). The order of reference reads thus :- 'A. suo motu reference is being made under S. 395(1) and/or S. 395(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (1974) in all cases pending before this Court No. 24 in which cognizance has been taken by the Court of Sessions before 4th January, 1991 to Hon'ble High Court on the question :- 'Whether right of speedy trial under Art. 21 of the Constitution of India is applicable to the Foreign Nationals', and 'Whether the proceedings pending against these Foreign Nationals need to be quashed for the denial of right of speedy trial under S. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1974 ?' B. Pen...
Lt. Col. Sohrab Vakil and Anr. Vs. B.G. Pimple, Junior Legal Assistant ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)BomCR297; (1992)94BOMLR725
A.A. Desai, J.1. In these proceedings, the petitioners, inter alia, claim that the Club does not carry any activity of Eating House as envisaged under section 394(e)(i) read with Schedule M, Part IV of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 ('the Act') and hence, in the absence of licence under the relevant provisions, are not henceforth liable to be prosecuted.2. The petitioner No. 2, a Sports Club, amongst others, principally carries an activity of promoting Yachting. To facilitate its members, the Club maintains a Dining Room. The petitioners since did not possess the requisite licence were prosecuted for the offence under section 394(1)(e)(i) read with section 471 of the Act. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate on conviction, awarded a fine of Rs. 250/-. The Club carried an appeal. The Appellate Judge has mainly placed reliance on a decision dated 5th August, 1980 delivered in Misc. Petition No. 399 of 1977, The Boots Company (India) Ltd. v. B.M.C., which has broadly followed t...
Sharad R. Khanna and ors. Vs. Industrial Credit and Investment Corp. o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)BomCR546
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. By this Notice of Motion, the judgment debtor is seeking to set aside the Insolvency Notice No. N/108 of 1991 dated 27th August, 1991. The judgment debtors had impugned the validity of the Insolvency Notice herein on various grounds which will all be dealt with in the later part of this order at its appropriate place.2. The material facts having bearing on the subject matter of this notice of motion are as under :(a) On 18th March 1987, a Common Loan Agreement was executed between M/s. Krimpex Synthetics Ltd., as 'borrowers' and Industrial Credit & Investment Corporation of India Ltd., as Lead Institution and Industrial Finance Corporation of India as 'lenders'. These two financial institutes advanced large amounts to M/s. Krimpex Synthetics Ltd. The Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India Ltd. and Industrial Finance Corporation of India have filed Suit No. 1595 of 1989 in this Court for a declaration that a sum of Rs. 1,11,30,538/- is due and payable b...
Jayshree Raghuvir Balgi Vs. Gokuldas Sheshgiri Prabhu
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)BomCR230
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. The material facts having bearing on the preliminary issues framed by the Court regarding locus standi of the Caveator to file the Caveat herein are as under :(a) On 30th June, 1983, the Testator Shri Shreeniwas alias Shrinath son of Manjanath Prabhu alias Shriniwas Manjunath Prabhu alias Shrinath Manjunath Prabhu died at Bombay. The deceased left his widow and two daughters, as mentioned in para 9 of the petition, i.e Mrs. Rukminibai Shriniwas Prabhu (widow), Vatsala Vinayak Pai (married daughter) and Jayshree Raghuvir Balgi (married daughter). The widow of the deceased is of unsound mind and is in the mental hospital in Kolhapur.(b) Jayshree Raghuvir Balgi has filed this petition for probate in respect of the Will dated 4th September 1977 contending that the deceased has left the said Will as his last Will at the time of his death. Shri Gokuldas Sheshgiri Prabhu, the nephew of the deceased had filed a Caveat.2. Even if the deceased had died intestate, the estate of...
Alax Fernandes Vs. State and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-1992
Reported in: 1993(2)BomCR55; (1993)95BOMLR404
E.S. Da Silva, J.1. The present application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Panaji, dated 14th July, 1992 in Criminal Revision Application No. 6 of 1992 which has affirmed the judgment of the Executive Magistrate, Pernam, dated 17th January, 1992 in Case No. JM/MAG/1/89 whereby the criminal proceedings under section 133 Cr.P.C. the learned Magistrate has made absolute the conditional order dated 12-1-1991 and directed the petitioner to remove laterite stones within seven days from the date of the order from a pathway allegedly existing in his property and allow an access of 3.5 metres to the extent of the length of 19.70 metres.2. The petitioner and others are the owners of a property situated at Tiracol village, Pernem Taluka, which is surveyed under Survey No. 60/30 of that village. On Alex D'Souza who is running a bar in a property adjoining the said property made a complaint to the Executive Magistr...
Mohanlal Chandulal Sarai Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-17-1992
Reported in: 1993(2)BomCR206; 1993CriLJ3298; 1993(1)MhLj365
Puranik, J.1. The petitioner had initially been issued an arms licence by the District Magistrate, Ludhiana on 20-11-1979 under the provisions of the Arms Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act') which was valid up to 19-11-1985. In the meantime, the petitioner made an application on 17-12-1979 for registration of his arms licence in Bombay. That application was considered and finally, the arms licence was registered in Bombay on 26-3-1986. The said arms licence was renewed from time to time and lastly it was renewed up to the period 19-11-1991. 2. A couple of months before the expiry of the said licence on 17-8-1991, a report about the involvement of the petitioner in a criminal case and possible breach of peace was received by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone V. 3. A show cause notice was issued on 30-9-1991 why the arms licence of the petitioners should not be revoked. The reply to the show cause notice was received from the petitioner on 24-10-1991. 4. As alread...
B. Malani and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-17-1992
Reported in: [1995]214ITR192(Bom)
V.A. Mohta J.1. This is the assessee's reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), on the following question : 'In the facts and circumstances of the case whether the Tribunal was right in disallowing the claim of the assessee for initial depreciation in respect of the plant and machinery installed by the assessee, but not put to use during the year ?' 2. The assessee claimed in the assessment year 1976-77 initial depreciation on two machines-crankshaft grinding machine and air compressor-valued at Rs. 2,41,281. The machinery was installed in 1975 and the production started in the year 1977. The Income-tax Officer refused the allowance on the ground that the conditions laid down in section 32(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act were not fulfilled because the machinery was not actually put to use in the accounting year previous to the assessment year. 3. We reproduce for ready reference the material part of section 32(1) :'32(1) In respect of depreciation ...
Seema Marutrao Devakar and ors. Vs. Shalan Purushottam Joshi and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-17-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)BomCR369
S.M. Daud, J.1. This is plaintiffs' appeal taking exception to the refusal of the trial Court to grant unto them a decree for specific performance vide agreement dated 13-12-1979 marked Exhibit 27.2. Appellants 1 and 2 are the wife and younger brother of Marutrao Devkar. Respondents-defendants 1 to 4 (Joshis) are the widow and children respectively of Purushottam Joshi. Respondents 5 to 7 are the tenants on the upper storeys of a three-storeyed house bearing City Survey No. 471/B, Narayan Peth, Pune. The said house originally belonged to Purushottam Joshi and came by inheritance after his death to the Joshis. The rent paid by defendants 5 to 7 is a meagre sum, not exceeding Rs. 200/- per month. Plaintiff No. 3 (Wadekar) is a real-estate broker doing business in the name and style of Wadekar Enterprises at Deccan Gymkhana, Pune. In the year 1979, defendant No. 4 Sheela was a spinster though of marriageable age. On 13-12-1979, Joshis executed Exhibit 27 in favour of plaintiff Nos. 1 and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »