Mumbai Court February 1993 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.
Prabhakar S/O Ramchandra Deshpande Vs. Zilla Parishad Akola and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-04-1993
Reported in: 1996(5)BomCR394
H.W. Dhabe, J.1. Parties by counsel. Rule heard forthwith.2. The petitioner is working in Zilla Parishad School, Washim. He is sought to be retired at the age of 58 years which according to the Zilla Parishad, is the age of the retirement for its employees including the teachers working in its school. The petitioner claims that his age of retirement should be 60 years as per the Exception to Rule 82.1 of the Secondary Schools Code applicable in the State of Maharashtra because he was teacher working in the Vidarbha Region and was confirmed in service prior to 31.12.1965. It is by now well settled that the above exception to Rule 82.1 of the Secondary Schools Code, intends to protect the age of retirement of the teachers in the Vidharbha Region who were erstwhile governed by the M.P. Education Act, 1951 and the Secondary Schools Code framed thereunder wherein the age of retirement was 60 years. It is clear from the exception to Rule 82.1 that it is applicable to a teacher who was in ser...
Pandurang Dnyandeo Hatkar and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-04-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ1381
K. Jayachandra Reddy, J.1. This is an appeal filed under the provisions of Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act.2. The two appellants herein were tried for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 307 read with 34, I.P.C. and they were acquitted by the trial Court. The State preferred an appeal to the High Court which set aside the order of acquittal and convicted the appellants under Sections 302 read with 34, I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life. They are further convicted under Sections 307 read with 34, I.P.C. and sentenced to five years' R.I. The sentences are directed to run concurrently.3. The prosecution case is as follows :The deceased Piraji Hari Hatkar, the two accused-appellants and the material witnesses belong to Village Turambe. The deceased was residing there with his wife and other members of the family. The appellants are full brothers and are distant cousins of the deceased and they shared land in which on...
Shibani Engineering Systems Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-04-1993
Reported in: 1993(47)LC39(Bombay)
ORDER1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard.The only justification that was put forth for not complying with the order of the CEGAT was the Department's intention to file Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court, as is clear from Exhibit T dated 20th October, 1992. Mr. Shah, learned Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 is not in a position to make any statement as to whether or not, the Special Leave Petition has at all been filed.2. Mr. Pochkhanawala, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, informs us after ascertaining, that he is in a position to make a statement that till date no such Special Leave Petition ha been filed.3. Settled legal position is that mere filing of the Special Leave Petition is not decisive of the matter. There is no justification whatsoever for detaining the issuance of detention certificate by Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 consequent upon the order of the CEGAT. We therefore direct them to issue detention certificate within a period of two weeks from today. Needless...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. New Standard Engineering Company Limite ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-03-1993
Reported in: [1994]208ITR710(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, made at the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal has referred the following question of law for opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law the Tribunal was justified in holding that the royalty payments to the three foreign concerns were not capital expenditure and in deleting the additions on that account ?' 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the Revenue Mr. G. S. Jetly at length. We have also gone through the statement of the case as well as relevant collaboration agreement. The assessment years involved in this case are 1971-72, 1972-73. Assessee-company was incorporated in the year 1939 as a private limited company and subsequently converted into public limited company in 1960-61. It had made payments in both these years, to M/s. Trutzschler of West Germany under collaboration agreements dt. 1st October, 1965 and 19th June, 1967, to M/s. B. & S. Massey Ltd. of U...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Lallubhai Nagardas and Sons
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-03-1993
Reported in: (1993)114CTR(Bom)58; [1993]204ITR93(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, made at the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following questions of law to this Court for opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the assessee, a firm of sharebrokers, was carrying on a profession for the purpose of computation of its tax liability ?' 2. The assessee is a registered partnership firm of shareholders. The assessment years involved in this reference are 1973-74, 1974-75 and 1975-76. The Controversy relates to the assessee's claim that as a sharebroker, it carried on a profession as distinguished from business. This controversy assume importance because the rates of surcharge was lower in the case or a registered firm whose total income included income from a profession carried on by it, in the two assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75, and the rate of Income-tax its...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. L. and T. Mcneil Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-03-1993
Reported in: (1993)112CTR(Bom)405; [1993]202ITR662(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, made at the instant of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two questions of law to this court for opinion :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee had set up their business in the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1974-75 2. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the interest income of Rs. 1,54,325 should be assessed as business income under section 28 and not under 'income from other sources' ?' 2. The assessee, Messrs. L and T McNeil Ltd., is a company incorporated under the companies Act, 1956. The assessment year involved is 1974-75 for which the previous year was the period from October 1, 1972, to December 31, 1973. It was incorporated on March 10, 1973, with the main object of manufacturing, buying, selling and dealing in all kinds of vulcanisers, tyres and t...
Kisan Ginning and Pressing Co-operative Society Vs. Divisional Joint R ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-03-1993
Reported in: 1994(2)BomCR238
A.D. Mane, J.1. In this petition there involves a short but important question relating to the interpretation of the words 'in addition' as used in sub-section (2) of section 73-B as well as section 73-BBB of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The petitioner Society is a society registered under the Act. Section 73-B of the Act provides for reservation of seats on committees of certain societies for Scheduled Castes. Scheduled Tribes and members of weaker sections. Section 73-BBB of the Act provides for the reservation of seats for women on the committee of the society who represent the women members, according to the strength of the members of the committee. Bye-laws of the petitioner society do not provide for such reservation, even though the provision relevant to reservation of seats as above is mandatory. On the eve of the election of the petitioner Society, the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, by his letter dated J...
Vithal Dewarshi Naik Banaulikar and anr. Vs. the Collector of Goa and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-03-1993
Reported in: 1993(2)BomCR466
A.A. Cazi, J.1. A common question of law has arisen in all these four writ petitions and, therefore, by consent, they all have been heard together and this judgment is in answer to that common question. The common question that arises is :Whether the action prescribed in sub-section (5) of section 83 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Village Panchayat Regulation, 1962 is a duty that falls within section 49 of the said Regulation.2. The facts in each of these four writ petitions insofar as they give rise to the above question are as follows The facts of Writ Petition No. 84 of 1990 are these:In this Petition respondent No. 1 is the Collector of Goa, respondent No. 2 is the Village Panchayat of Siolim-Sodiem and respondent No. 3 is Smt. Kamal R. Goltekar. The petitioner's case is that he is one of the 22 co-owners who own a property by name 'VANGOD BHAT surveyed under No. 214/1 and is situated at Sodiem, Siolim, Bardez, Goa. Respondent No. 3 with her family resides in a house bearing survey No. ...
H. and R. Johnson (India) Ltd. and anr. Vs. the Municipal Commissioner ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-03-1993
Reported in: 1993(3)BomCR356
A.P. Shah, J.1. The short question for determination in this writ petition is whether clay imported by the first respondent Company is exigible to octroi under Entry 45 of the Ist Schedule of the Maharashtra-Municipalities (Octroi) Rules, 1968 at the rate of 4% ad-valorem or at the rate of Re. 1/- per tonne under Entry 45 of the said Schedule.2. Every Municipal Council or Corporation is entitled to levy octroi under section 105 of the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965. The Government of Maharashtra has framed Rules called Maharashtra Municipalities (Octroi) Rules, 1968 under sub-section (2) of section 321 read with the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 105 of the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965. Schedule I of the said Rules classifies all specified goods either on the basis of their usage or the materials used in their manufacture. So-far as the present petition is concerned, the relevant entries are found in Class IV, which bears the heading 'Building and other constructio...
Gani Manulal Atar Vs. Smt. Mathurabia W/O Shankar Nagarkar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-03-1993
Reported in: (1993)95BOMLR779
Bhimrao N. Naik, J.1. This is petition filed by the tenant challenging the decree for 'possession passed against him. on the ground of non-payment of rent by the Courts below.2. Few facts which are relevant for the purpose of decision in this case are as follows:Respondent-landlord field Regular Civil Suit No. 108 of 1975 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Pandharpur, for possession on the ground of non-payment of rent, as also on the ground of change of user. The respondent-landlord relied upon the notice of demand dated 13th January, 1975 wherein he demanded rent of Rs. 56.65 ps. The agreed rent was Rs. 125 per annum but payable by month at the rate of Rs. 10.41 ps. Though the notice was received on 14th January, 1975 no reply was sent, however, on 12th February, 1975 a sum of Rs. 300 was sent. Since the entire amount was sent the respondent-landlord treated the petitioner as a defaulter and filed Regular Suit No. 108 of 1975 on 4th April, 1975.3. The learned Trial Jud...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »