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.
Shri Krishna P. Rivonkar Vs. the Chairman, V.K.S.C. Society and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-04-1992
Reported in: 1993(2)BomCR261
E.S. Da Silva, J.1. By this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution the petitioner is challenging the judgment and Order dated 28-2-1991 of the Administrative Tribunal, Goa, Daman and Diu, in Eviction Appeal No. 52 of 1988 which has upheld the judgment and Order of the Additional Rent Controller, Ponda, dated 4-10-1988 in case No. B.I.D.G./2/88. By the aforesaid judgment and order of the Additional Rent Controller dismissed an application filed by the petitioner against the respondent No. 1 under section 23(3) of the Rent Control Act (hereinafter called 'the Act') seeking the eviction of the respondent No. 1 (hereinafter called 'the respondent') from the part of the leased premises located in the same building which is being occupied by the petitioner on the ground of his requirement of that leased premises for his additional accommodation. However, the said dismissal of the application was done by the Rent Controller not on the merits of the application, but...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Khairunsi Mirad Hajarat Mull ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-04-1992
Reported in: II(1992)ACC724; 1994ACJ929
P.S. Patankar, J.1. All the above-mentioned appeals, except First Appeal No. 876 of 1985, have been filed by the insurance company. The First Appeal No. 876 of 1985 is filed by the owner of the vehicle. All these appeals raise one common question, that is, what is nature of enquiry to be made by the Tribunal before fastening the responsibility upon the insurance company under Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereafter called 'the Act').2. Strictly speaking, it will not be necessary to state the facts of each case considering the view that I am taking, however, some facts in nutshell are as follows:First Appeal No. 142 of 1984The accident took place on 9.5.1983 in which one Hajarat Kondibhai Mulla, aged about 35 years, who was working as a mechanic died. He was one of the passengers in tempo bearing No. MTL 5613 which met with an accident due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver. Hajarat Kondibhai was carrying certain luggage, i.e., material and instruments of hi...
New India Assurance Co. and ors. Vs. Khairunsi Mirad Hajarat Mulla and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-04-1992
Reported in: 1(1994)ACC606
P.S. Patankar, J.1. All the above mentioned Appeals, except First Appeal No. 876 of 1985, have been filed by the Insurance Company. The First Appeal No. 876 of 1985 is filed by the owner of the vehicle. All these appeals raised one common question that is what is nature of enquiry to be made by the Tribunal before fastening the responsibility upon the Insurance Company under Section 92A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereafter called 'Motor Vehicles Act').2. Strictly speaking it will not be necessary to state the facts of each case considering the view that I am taking, however some facts in nutshell are as follows:First Appeal No. 142 of 1984--The accident took place on 9th May, 1983, in which one Hajarat Kondibhai Mulla, aged about 35 years, who was working as a mechanic died. He was one of the passengers in Tempo bearing No. MTL 5613 which met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of the driver. Hajarat Kondibhai was carrying certain luggage, i.e. material and instrum...
Smt. Farrel Futado Vs. State of Goa and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-03-1992
Reported in: 1993(2)BomCR561; [1994]80CompCas659(Bom)
S.H. Kapadia, J.1. By this writ petition the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated January 30, 1992, issued by the State Government as published in the Official Gazette dated January 31, 1992, by which the petitioner was removed from the office as a director of the Economic Development Corporation and consequently as chairperson of the said board of Economic Development Corporation. By the said writ petition, the petitioner also seeks to challenge the nomination of respondent No. 3 as the director of the said corporation as a result of the vacancy caused by the removal of the petitioner and also nomination by the Government of respondent No. 3 as chairman of the said corporation for a period of three years from the date of the impugned notification. 2. Briefly, the facts giving rise to this writ petition are as follows : (a) On March 29, 1990, the Government of Goa issued a notification, inter alia, accepting the resignation dated February 12, 1990, tendered by one Ramesh Chowg...
Dr. Rohit Desai Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-03-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2730
ORDER1. This criminal application is filed by the present petitioner against the order dated 15th June, 1992 passed by the Judge, N.D.P.S. Special Court, (Court No. 24), Greater Bombay, in Bail Application No. 260 of 1992 and Bail Application No. 254 of 1992 in Remand Application No. 72 of 1992 (arising out of Narcotic Cell, K. Division, C.R. No. 17 of 1992).2. By the aforesaid judgment and order, the trial Court rejected the application for bail preferred by the present petitioner who is original accused No. 3. The only question which I have to decide is as to whether the present petitioner is entitled for the grant of bail under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act of 1985. 3. The petitioner in this case is Ph.D. in Organic Chemistry and is resident of Vapi. The petitioner was arrested at Vapi in Gujarat on 12th April, 1992. It is the case of the prosecution that on the basis of information which they received they carried out raid in godown No. 26, Building, Bhangwadi, Kalbadevi Road, Bom...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Sayyed Mohammed Sayyad Kazim and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-03-1992
Reported in: 1994(2)BomCR212; 1993CriLJ1468
1. This appeal is a companion appeal of Criminal Appeal No. 290 of 1985. The three respondents stood charged with having committed offences punishable under section 18(c) read with Section 27(b) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. Accused No. 3 is a firm : accused No. 1 is the proprietor and accused No. 2 is the Manager of that firm. It is alleged that on 2-2-1977, a trap was arranged whereby a bogus customer was asked to purchase a tin of Vicks Vaporub from the accused which he did. The evidence is quite conclusive of the fact that the tin of Vicks was sold and that the liability of the accused Nos. 1 to 3 for having dealt with this item without possessing a valid licence was also established. The learned Magistrate, however, took note of the fact that the firm did in fact possess a licence at an earlier point of time and that it was only a technical breach in so far as the licence stood in the name of the earlier proprietor and secondly, that the licence was not current at the time of th...
Pune Municipal Corporation and anr. Vs. Mohan Shrikrishna Assava
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-03-1992
Reported in: 1992(3)BomCR540; (1993)95BOMLR581
S.M. Daud, J.1. Appellants, the Pune Municipal Corporation and the Municipal Commissioner-hereinafter referred to as 'PMC'-take exception to a decree for damages passed against them in an action brought by the plaintiff/respondent.2. The admitted and indisputable facts in the background of which the points arising for determination have to be considered, may be stated thus:Plaintiff-respondent before us - is a transporter to whom belongs goods truck bearing registration No. MTD 2619. The PMC us entitled to levy various taxes and imposts under section 127 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949-hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. Octroi is a cess leviable upon the entry of the goods into the limits of the city of Pune, which goods are meant for consumption, use or sale therein vide Clause 42 of section 2 of the Act. Plaintiff has a house at Gultekdi in Pune No. 9 and on 28-11-1978 the aforementioned truck was found parked in front of the said house. The truck was loa...
Dhonaji Vyankatrao Ghatage Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-03-1992
Reported in: 1994(2)BomCR213
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. The appellant before me, at the relevant time, was working as a Talathi in the office of Waghare Saja, Taluka Radhanagari and it is alleged that in relation to certain mutation entries, which had to be done for the complainant who is P.W. 3 Ananda Arade, he had made a demand of Rs. 150/-. According to Arade, the matter had been pending for quite some time and he was anxious that it should be concluded. The accused had visited the village on 15-8-1983 at the time of the flag hoisting function and Arade met him along with P.W. 4 Pundalik and requested him to complete his work. The accused is alleged to have demanded Rs. 500/- which, after some bargaining, was reduced to Rs. 150/- and the complainant agreed to come with the money after two days. On 16-8-1983, he went to Kolhapur and lodged a complaint with the Anti-Corruption authorities, who arranged a trap.2. It is relevant to record that the Investigating Officer very clearly instructed Arde that he should engage th...
Lakhanpal National Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-02-1992
Reported in: 1993(63)ELT61(Bom)
ORDER1. This writ petition is directed against an elaborate judgment and order dated 30-3-1992 passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, West Regional Bench, Bombay (hereinafter referred to as the CEGAT). This order was made by the CEGAT in an appeal filed by the writ petitioners overruling their objection relating to the request of prosecuting agency being represented by an authorised representative i.e. Advocate in the adjudication proceedings before the Collector (see Exhibit C to the petition). 2. The Division Bench of this Court on 29-7-1992 issued rule nisi and granted ad interim order in terms of prayer (b) and adjourned the writ petition for further hearing on interim relief to 31-7-1992. Matter was adjourned from time to time and today the writ petition is placed before us for considering interim relief. 3. Mr. Hidaytulla, learned Counsel appearing in support of this petition prayed that since this Court has issued rule nisi and granted ad interim or...
Ganpati Kundalika Dubal and ors. Vs. Shamu Krishna Kadam and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-01-1992
Reported in: (1992)94BOMLR466
A.A. Desai, J.1. The State on a dispute over the land initiated proceedings under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Special Executive Magistrate came to the conclusion that at the time of dispute the applicant Ganpati Kundalika Dubai and others were in possession of the suit field and directed to handover the paddy crop to the petitioners.2. Respondent No. 1 being aggrieved by the order of the Magistrate preferred Criminal Revision Application. The Additional Sessions Judge by the impugned order, dated 21.12.1987 reversed the order of the Magistrate. Hence this Revision.3. Heard Mr. Patil at length. According to him, the Additional Sessions Judge has misdirected himself while deciding the issue. He urged that the only question in the proceedings under Section 145 of the Code was that whether the petitioner was in possession of the suit land at the relevant time? However, the Sessions Judge has gone into the question of the title of the petitioner and, therefore, came t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »