Mumbai Court June 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.
Ravindra Anant Deshmukh Vs. City and Industrial Development Corporatio ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-08-1993
Reported in: 1994(1)BomCR337; (1993)95BOMLR658
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. This is a petition under section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. The petition is numbered as a suit. The petition deserves to be dismissed in exercise of judicial discretion of Court having regard of unfair, unjust and inequitable conduct of the petitioner as would be obvious from the facts set out in later part of this order. Section 20(4) of the Arbitration Act entitles the Court to refuse relief to the applicant for any 'sufficient cause' even if all other conditions prescribed under the said section are satisfied and even if the application made to the Court is technically maintainable. The relevant facts are summarised hereinafter.2. The petitioner carries on business as a Building Contractor and Developer in the name and style of United Precast Products as its sole proprietor. The respondent is a public sector Corporation constituted to organise and carry out `development work' in Maharashtra. Some time in the year 1981, a contract was awarded by the responden...
Wefapres Workstroffe Beck and Company Chbc Vs. Kingsley Industries P. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-08-1993
Reported in: (1993)95BOMLR145
S.M. Jhunjhunuwala, J.1. The disputes arising out of or relating to the Agreement for Transfer of Technology dated 5th June, 1986 entered between the petitioner and respondent were referred to arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration Rules of the Indo-German Chamber of Commerce, Bombay and an Award dated 1st August, 1991 was made which was filed in this Court and numbered as Award No. 157 of 1991. Notice of filing of the said Award in this Court was served both upon the petitioner and respondent. No petition to set aside, remit or remand the said Award was filed. On 24th March, 1992, Judgment and Decree in terms of the said Award was passed by this Court. At that time, no application was made on behalf of the petitioner for grant of interest on the decretal amount from the date of the decree till payment or realisation thereof. The present petition has been filed for review of the said Order and decree passed on 24th March, 1992 so as to grant interest to the petitioner on the de...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Berry's Hotels Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-07-1993
Reported in: [1994]207ITR615(Bom)
V.A. Mohta, J.1. The following question is referred under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the behest of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assessee is an 'industrial company' as defined in section 2(7) (c) of the Finance Act, 1973 ?' 2. The relevant assessment year is 1973-74. Berry's Hotels Private Ltd., Bombay - the assessee - is a new company, incorporated on September 4, 1971, for carrying on hotel business. It took over the running business of Messrs. Santosh Aruna and Company - a partnership firm. The activity of the assessee consisted of cooking food and preparing dishes for service to the customers. The assessee contended that this activity amounted to 'processing' as contemplated by the definition of the term 'industrial company' in the Finance Act, 1973, and hence, it fell within the definition and hence was entitled to the concessional rate ...
Sow. Leelabai Arun Pathangare and ors. Vs. Arun Deoram Pathangare
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-07-1993
Reported in: II(1993)DMC470
A.D. Mane, J.1. These three Criminal Writ Petitions arise out of proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure initiated by the wife-petitioner in Writ Petition No. 56 of 1993 against her husband, who is also petitioner in companion Writ Petition Nos. 395 and 396 of 1992.2. There involves a common question of facts and law and, therefore, these petitions can be disposed of by common judgment. The material facts giving rise to these writ petitions may be stated as follows :The petitioner-wife married the respondent-husband on May 5, 1981 according to Hindu rites and customs. She stayed with the respondent-husband till September 9, 1984. She was, however, said to have been driven out of her matrimonial home. She, therefore, filed an application under Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure on April 22, 1985 claiming maintenance from the respondent-husband at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month. The acts and accusation of the petitioner-wife against the husband-respondent ...
Suvarn Rajaram Bandekar Vs. Rajaram Bandekar (Sirigao) Mines Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-03-1993
Reported in: [1997]88CompCas673(Bom)
G.D. Kamat J.1. Company Petition No. 4-R of 1992, is by a creditor for winding up of the company, Rajaram Bandekar (Sirigao) Mines Pvt. Ltd., under sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956. It is averred in the petition that the company is indebted in the sum of Rs. 38,96,460 as on February 23, 1992, being the amount due under a decree of the Civil Court, Vasco da Gama, dated April 12, 1991, made in Special Civil Suit No. 36 of 1990. According to the petitioner, the company was directed to pay to the petitioner a total amount of Rs. 66,48,252.04 by way of instalments on dates set out in Schedules I and II annexed to the petition and that the company defaulted in payment of the second instalments of payment of Rs. 5,40,000. The company was called upon to pay the defaulted instalment by a notice dated August 9, 1991, but under the reply of the company dated August 19, 1991, the company whilst not denying that the instalment had not been paid, denied that there was any default and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›