Mumbai Court August 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.
Rajaram Bapu Pawar and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-26-1993
Reported in: 1994(1)BomCR274; (1994)ILLJ954Bom
Sujata Manohar, J.1. Writ Petition No. 1475 of 1987 is filed by the petitioners who are carrying on business as Hundekaris in various vegetable markets in Bombay. The second petitioner is a registered body of such Hundekaris. The petition is filed in a representative capacity on behalf of all the Hundekaris for a direction that the decision of the State Government contained in letter dated February 16, 1987 as a result of which the petitioners were refused registration as 'employers' under the Vegetable Markets Unprotected Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Scheme, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the said Scheme), should be set aside and that they should be permitted to register themselves as employers under the said Scheme.2. At the stage of granting interim reliefs in the petition, the learned single Judge of this Court, in his order dated February 16, 1987 directed that as and by way of an interim arrangement the petitioners should be registered under the said Scheme as...
Sidramappa Mutyappa Mengane Since Deed. Through Legal Heirs Vs. Mahade ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-26-1993
Reported in: 1994(1)BomCR568
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. An interesting angle touching the interpretation of section 13(1)(g) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as 'the Rent Act') has been canvassed by learned Counsel representing the parties in this petition and it is a facet that does require some degree of elucidation. In a proceeding where a landlord seeks the exercise of his right of re-entry by evicting the tenant on the ground that the premises are reasonably and bona fide required for his own use and where it is demonstrated that the landlord is in occupation of other premises in respect of which there is no threat or compulsion requiring him to vacate therefrom, whether this aspect can be canvassed as a ground to negative the enforcement of the right conferred under section 13(1)(g) of the Rent Act. In other words, quite apart from the aspects of balance of convenience, relative hardship, etc., which the landlord is able to satisfy...
Anil Dinanath Rane Vs. Aruna Anil Rane
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-26-1993
Reported in: I(1994)DMC9
A P. Shah, J.1.This appeal by the husband is directed against the dismissal of his petition for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.2. The brief facts leading to the present litigation are as follows :--The parties, both Hindus, were married on December 16, 1985 at Bombay as per Hindu vedic rites. At the time of marriage the appellant had no permanent job and he was working as television mechanic on daily basis. The respondent was, however, working as a Clerk-cum-Typist. After the marriage the couple started staying in one room tenement in Rule Building, Fanaswadi, Bombay. The couple was blessed with a male child in November, 1986. In or about March, 1987, the respondent lost her job. Since then it appears that quarrels started between the parties which finally culminated in an incident of 10th May, 1987 in respect of which the respondent filed a complaint to the police. On the next day, i.e. 11th May, 1987, the respondent went to her parents' house and has ...
Chandrashekhar Keshav Umbranikar Vs. Rohini Chandrashekhar Umbranikar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-26-1993
Reported in: I(1994)DMC25
M.K. Mukherjee, C.J.1. The appellant filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, in the Family Court, Pune, seeking dissolution of his marriage with the respondent on the ground of cruelty and desertion. As the petition was rejected and the appellant was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 600/- per month for the maintenance of the respondent and a further sum of Rs. 200/- per month for the maintenance of their minor daughter, he has filed the instant appeal.2. It is not in dispute that the appellant married the respondent according to Hindu rites on December 5, 1987 and thereafter they started living in Pune where a daughter was born to them on November 13, 1988. It is also not in dispute that on March 3, 1989 the respondent left her matrimonial home and since then she is living with her parents. According to the appellant, the respondent is very rude, arrogant and quarrelsome. Besides, she did not do any household work. His next averment in his petition is that whenev...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. G.N. Agrawal (individual)
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-1993
Reported in: [1996]217ITR250(Bom)
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. By this reference under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this Court for our opinion at the instance of the Revenue : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to deduction for depreciation on the written down value of the trucks which were under repair throughout the relevant accounting years but were used for the purpose of the business earlier and later ?' 2. We have heard learned counsel for both the parties. The following facts clearly emerge from the record : (i) The trucks in question were used by the assessee for the purpose of his business. (ii) The said trucks were used for the business of the assessee during the relevant years as well as earlier and later years. (iii) During the relevant assessment years, some of these trucks were under repair. The only controversy that is raised by the above question is as to whether the trucks can be said to have been no...
Shashichand JaIn and Others Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-1993
Reported in: 1994(3)BomCR270; [1995]213ITR184(Bom)
Mrs. Sujata Manohar, J.1. All these writ petitions are for a writ of certiorari against the respondents for quashing or setting aside criminal complaints which have been filed against the petitioners in each of the writ petitions and in the alternative for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to withdraw and/or forbear from taking any steps in pursuance of criminal complaints which have been filed against the petitioners. 2. The facts are common to all these petitions. The petitioners in each of these petitions were originally the tenants of various premises in a building known as Shikhar Kunj situated at 29A Carmichael Road, Bombay-400 026, which was owned by one Sahu Brothers (Saurashtra) Pvt. Ltd. The share capital in this company was held by some of the tenants. Each of the petitioners was paying a monthly rent to the said company. The premises were covered by the Bombay Rents Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947. The said company entered into an agreement date...
Agrawal Minerals (Goa) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-1993
Reported in: [1994]208ITR536(Bom)
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. At the instance of the assessee, Messrs. Agrawal Minerals (Goa) Pvt. Ltd., Goa, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur, has referred the following questions to this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for opinion :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 92,271 paid by the assessee to Messrs. G.N. Agrawal (Hindu undivided family) in respect of the staff of G.N. Agrawal, Hindu undivided family, was an allowable deduction under the Income-tax Act ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 23,298 credited by the assessee to the accounts of the individual members of the staff was an allowable expenditure under the Income-tax Act ?' 2. The relevant facts having a bearing on the subject-matter of this reference are as under :During the accounting year pertaining to the assessment year 1973-74, the assessee made a provision of Rs. 1,15,569 on account of staff re...
Blue Star Ltd. Vs. Blue Star Workers Union and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-1993
Reported in: 1994(2)BomCR352; (1995)ILLJ138Bom
A.V. Savant, J. 1. Heard both the learned Counsel, Shri Cama for the petitioner and Shri Deshmukh for the first respondent-Union. 2. The petition seeks to challenge the interim order dated 23rd July, 1993 passed by the Industrial Court, Bombay, below Exhibit U-2 in Complaint (ULP) No. 702 of 1993. Under the impugned interim order, the petitioner Company has been restrained from retiring the concerned employee Krishna Hedulkar. The Company has been further directed to permit Krishna Hedulkar to report on duty and to pay him regularly his wages. The complaint has been expedited, to be decided within a period of 6 months. A few facts may be stated as under. 3. Krishna Hedulkar has been employed with the petitioner Company since 1st August, 1968. He has so far put in 25 years of service and his age is only 48 years. He is fit to work. The age of superannuation is 60 years. There is no domestic inquiry pending against him, much less is he facing any threat of dismissal. Hedulkar who is empl...
Madhusudan Dhondu Parkar Vs. Vandana Madhusudan Parkar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-1993
Reported in: I(1994)DMC134
A.P. Shah, J.1. This appeal is directed against the dismissal of a Matrimonial Petition filed by the husband for a decree of divorce and in the alternative a decree for judicial separation on the ground of cruelty.2. In order to appreciate the controversy between the parties, few admitted facts need to be stated first:--The marriage between the appellant Madhusudan and the respondent Vandana was an arranged marriage and it took place on May 13, 1979 at Bombay as per Hindu vedic rites and thereafter they made their matrimonial home in a one room tenement in a building known as 'Anand' at Dadar. The said room belongs to the appellant's maternal aunt Muktabai. Out of this wedlock, a male child, Sachin, was born on November 19, 1980.3. The present petition was filed by the appellant in the Family Court, Bombay on August 4, 1989 alleging several acts of cruelty on the part of the respondent, more particularly narrated in paragraph 14 of the petition. The appellant alleged that the responden...
Assistant Commissioner of Gift Tax Vs. Unique Construction.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-1993
Reported in: (1994)48TTJ(Mumbai)490
ORDERM. K. CHATURVEDI, J.M. :This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of CGT(A)-XVIII, Bombay, and pertains to the asst. yr. 1985-86.2. Solitary ground raised in this appeal projects the following grievance :'On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the firm is not liable for any gift-tax and that the deemed gift worked out by the GTO is without any basis and improper and thereby erred in deleting the deemed gift of Rs. 15,87,160 considered for gift-law.'The assessee is a registered firm. The Assessing Officer found that during the relevant year of assessment, it had transferred five flats in its building at Bandra to its five retiring partners. The book value of these flats had been shown at Rs. 23,93,260 and the retiring partners had altogether a credit balance of Rs. 10,01,097. The transfer was effected by debiting the partners accounts. This resulted in total debit balance of Rs. 13,92,163 in the partners...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »