Mumbai Court July 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.
Kaizer Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-27-1993
Reported in: (1993)95BOMLR795
M.G. Chaudhari, J.1. Admit. Notice waived. By consent appeal taken on board for final orders.2. The Deputy Municipal Commissioner, Zone IV by order, dated 25-5-1991 in proceeding arising out of original notice issued under Section 351 Bombay Municipal Corporation Act by the Corporation to the appellants dated 11.7.1986 gave the following directions :The plaintiff is directed to put up a proposal to regularise the stair case, electric cabin and servants' toilet to the Executive Engineer (Bldg. Proposal) Western Suburbs within a fortnight without fail. The E.E. (B.P.) W.S. will work out the premium/penalty as approved by the Ch. E. (D.P.) and communicate to the party within one month. The action under Section 351 of the B. M.C. Act is dropped subject to the payment of the premium/penalty by the party within 15 days from the date of demand from the E.E. (B.P.) W.S.3. Thereafter on 14.6.1993 the appellants received a letter-cum-notice, from the office of the Deputy Municipal Commissioner, ...
Sau. Saraswati Mahadeo Jadyal Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-26-1993
Reported in: 1994(3)BomCR79
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. The courts while dealing with cases of persons suffering from mental ailments of a sufficiently serious gravity and therefore qualifying for the immunity conferred by section 84 of the Indian Penal Code, are of necessity obliged to consider certain additional aspects beyond the medico legal frame work. Where the accused happens to be a woman and a person coming from the poorest strata of society, the obligation on the Court gets accentuated. The law undoubtedly exonerates from punishment an accused who is legally insane and who therefore was not in a position to know the consequences of his or her acts at the time of the commission of the offence. The Criminal Procedure Code prescribes the manner in which persons of unsound mind are required to be dealt with and in general requires the Court to commit such a person to a Mental Hospital for appropriate treatment. A Court before whom a defense of insanity succeeds cannot merely acquit the accused but will of necessity...
Sadhana Textile Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Gulabchand GayadIn and ors. E ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-1993
Reported in: 1994(3)BomCR73; (1994)IILLJ906Bom
ORDERB.P. Saraf, J.1. This batch of writ petitions is directed against the judgment and order dated May 30, 1989 of the Industrial Court, Bombay on appeals under Section 84 of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 ('the Act'). First 12 petitions have been filed by the employer individually against each of the workmen who were parties to the proceeding before the Industrial Court and one writ petition viz. Writ Petition No. 868 of 1990 has been filed jointly by all the 12 workmen.2. As the facts and issues involved are common and the controversy arises out of the common order of the Industrial Court, all these writ petitions were taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. The facts giving rise to these petitions, briefly, stated are as follows:Sadhana Textile Mills Private Limited, the petitioner in the first 12 writ petitions, is the employer. The principal respondents in all these above petitions are the workmen. Sadhana Textile Mill...
Nandram Kaniram and ors. Vs. N.B.Rahatekr
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-1993
Reported in: 1994(1)BomCR28
V.A. Mohta, J.1. Dr. N. B. Rahateker, M.B.B.S., D.O.R.S., carrying on medical profession in the city of Pune (the plaintiff) entered into the following transaction with a trading firm Messrs. Nandram Kaniram, through its proprietor Vithaldas Kaniram Bajaj, carrying on business in the city of Pune (the defendant).Plaintiff paid a sum of Rs. 15,000/- to the defendant through a cheque dated 24th June 1976 through a Hundi Dalal. On that day the defendant gave a post-dated cheque for Rs. 15.000 dated 22nd September 1976, and a cheque for Rs. 562/- representing interest on Rs. 15,000 for a period of 90 days.2. It is common ground that this is not the only transaction of this nature between the parties. During last seven years, such transactions were entered into by plaintiff with some others traders. Total of these transactions was 6 or 7. Basic question that arises in this second appeal is whether the plaintiff could be said to carry on 'the business of money-lending' so as to bring him wit...
Nanji Ranchoddas Tawadia Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-1993
Reported in: 1994(1)BomCR238
Ashok Agarwal, J.1. The appellant is the original accused. At the relevant time he was a Senior Clerk in the office of the Deputy Chief Officer (Transit Camp), Bombay Housing and Area Development Board at Sion Koliwadi, Bombay. He was thus a public servant within the meaning of section 21 of the Indian Penal Code. At the trial, he was charged for offences punishable under section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 5(1)(d) read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for having, on or about the 6th of August, 1984, demanded a sum of Rs. 1,000/- as a gratification other than legal remuneration as a motive for rendering services to the complainant - P.W.1 Gauri Shankar Ojha for exercising his influence with the officials of the B.H. & A.D. Board for allotment of a tenement in Transit Camp to the complainant, who was a displaced person on account of his original tenement having been acquired by the Board for demolition and reconstruction and for having, on the 8th...
Bank of Baroda Vs. Fairgrowth Financial Services Ltd. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1993
Reported in: [1994]80CompCas789(Bom)
ORDERS.N. Variava, J.1. Before this court there are a number of petitions/ applications by various parties, mainly financial institutions, claiming that they have rights in properties which today stand attached by virtue of the provisions of the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992 (hereinafter for brevity's sake referred to as 'the said Act'). These claims are, broadly speaking, by way of banker's lien, set off and the right to adjust accounts and/or as pledges and/or under documents giving rights of assignment of debts and/or under documents of hypothecation. All these parties claim that by virtue of the special right/ interest created in their favour either under some document or under law, the properties in question have been wrongly attached. They claim that they are entitled to appropriate those properties towards their claims.2. In all these matters, the Custodian has contended that irrespective of any special rights, the properties ...
Ashok Krishnaji Bochare Vs. Nagpur Dt. Central Co-op. Bank Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1993
Reported in: [1994(68)FLR231]; (1994)IILLJ142Bom
V.S. Sirpurkar, J.1. In this petition, the order passed by the Industrial Court, Nagpur allowing the revision filed on behalf of the Nagpur District Central Co-operative Bank Limited, Nagpur (hereinafter called 'the Bank') against the order of reinstatement passed by First Labour Court, Nagpur is in challenge.2. The petitioner Ashok Bochare at the relevant time was working as a Clerk with the afore-mentioned Bank since 1977. While he was so serving, huge misappropriations came to the light and consequently, a charge-sheet was given to him dated August 13, 1988. In the charge-sheet very serious charges came to be levelled. The said charges related to the misappropriation of about Rs. 12,535/-. As many as four charges came to be levelled and it was alleged that the petitioner received in all Rs. 12,535/- from 14 persons for depositing the same in the bank and while the petitioner entered these transactions in the individual ledgers and the pass-books and also gave the counter-slips to th...
Bapuappa S/O Punjappa Wani Vs. Shiram S/O Balwanta Muley and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1993
Reported in: 1996(1)BomCR107
V.S. Sirpurkar, J.1. This judgment will govern the two writ petitions, the first being Writ Petition No. 1933 of 1989 which is filed by Bapuappa who claims to be the transferee of the landlord and the Writ Petition No. 2147 of 1988 which is filed by Shriram Balwanta & Kondiba Balwanta, both of whom admittedly were the tenants of the field in question.2. The dispute relates to field Survey No. 13, admeasuring 24 acres & 26 gunthas of Mouza Merkhed, Tq. & District Buldana. This suit field originally belonged to one Amrut Waman Dalal. The father of the petitioners, namely, Balwanta was a protected lessee of this field. Amrut sold this field to three persons in all, first of them being Bapuappa s/o Punjappa Wani who purchased 7/16th share, the second being Tarachand s/o Kisanlal Agrawal who also purchased 7/16th share and third Uttamrao s/o Mugutrao Deshmukh who purchased 2/16th share. This sale was on 17-8-1958. It is the case further that Bapuappa, Tarachand and Uttamrao entered into the...
Indian Bank Vs. Fuel Injections Ltd. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1993
Reported in: 1994(1)BomCR260
Sujata Manohar, J.1. The appeal is from an order in the Chamber Summons No. 1110 of 1987 declining the application of the appellants who are original plaintiffs to amend the plaint by deleting the name of Ramesh Pallod as the sole proprietor of Bharat Agencies, the 3rd defendant, or in the alternative, by substituting the name of Kashinath Pallod for the name of Ramesh Pallod as the sole proprietor of Bharat Agencies.2. The appellants, who are the original plaintiffs have filed a summary suit being Summary Suit No. 909 of 1986 against (1) Messrs. Fuel Injections Limited, (2) Vijay D. Char, and (3) 'Ramesh It. Pallod of Bombay Indian Inhabitant carrying on business in the name and style of Bharat Agencies as the sole proprietor thereof ....'. The suit is on 49 bills of exchange, all dated 26th February, 1983. The bills of exchange were drawn by Fuel Injections Limited. The bills of exchange were drawn on Messrs. Bharat Agencies and Messrs. Bharat Agencies had accepted these bills of exc...
Deoram Tulshiram Patil Vs. Zilla Parishad and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1993
Reported in: 1994(2)BomCR525
V.A. Mohta, J.1. Appellant/Original Plaintiff is a contractor. He undertook to make special repairs of 'Taharabad Bandhara' constructed by the respondents/Original defendants - the Zilla Parishad, Nasik. After the work was completed, measurements were taken and final bill for Rs. 2861/- was prepared on 25-3-1970 and was sanctioned on 31-3-1970. But the amount was not paid despite correspondence. Last demand notice was given on 15-5-1970. The Zilla Parishad did not dispute the liability to pay the said amount, but refused to pay saying that the amount was adjusted in the previous arrears due in respect of some other work carried out in the year 1963. Since there was no positive response, ultimately the suit was filed for recovery of a sum of Rs. 2861/- and interest by way of damages.2. The trial Court decreed the suit holding that there was no justification - legal or factual - for withholding the sanctioned amount. No other point about maintainability of the suit was raised by the defe...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »