Mumbai Court January 1994 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.
Dharan Prints Vs. Collector of Central Excise and
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-06-1994
Reported in: (1994)(45)ECC74
1. This appeal is directed against the Order in Appeal No.PCJ/79/SRT/93 dt. 12-10-1993 confirming the Order-in-original No.SRT-III/ADJ-8/93/OA dated 15-2-1993 directing confiscation of the goods as was conditionally ordered in the adjudication proceedings that were initiated against the appellant. In the proceedings initiated earlier, there was an order of confiscation of the goods but an option to redeem the same was however, granted. The appellants however, were granted one month's time for exercising option to redeem the same. The said order was passed on 30-6-1992. The appellant however, did not exercise the option within this time specified and hence the Supdt. of C.E. wrote a letter dt. 19-10-1992 which was received by the appellants on 7-11-1993 asking them to pay the fine in lieu of confiscation immediately and the appellants paid the redemption fine on 13-11-1992. Thereafter however, the Asst. Collector passed an order to the effect that the appellants having failed to exerci...
Narayan and Etc. Etc. Vs. Asstt. Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Ya ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-05-1994
Reported in: AIR1994Bom239
ORDER1. This judgment shall govern Writ Petitions Nos. 1510/1991, 1511/1991 and 1546/1991, as an identical point is involved in all the three petitions. Petitioners in all the three petitions were the members of one Housing Society, i.e., Kanyaka Griha Nirman Sahakari Sanstha Ltd., Yavatmal respondent No. 3. All the three petitioners had purchased the plots from the society. All the three petitioners were served with a notice dated 4-1-1986 calling upon them to pay the arrears by 31-1-1986, failing which asper bye-laws No. 4-A(2) their membership would be terminated. It has been stated in the said notice that for effecting the said termination a special general meeting would be held on 1-2-1986 and the petitioners were required to attend the same. It is an admitted fact that on 1-2-1986, the said meeting was actually held and in that the petitioners' membership was terminated in pursuance of S. 35.1 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The resolution No. 1 specifically ...
Elegant Teletubes Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-04-1994
Reported in: (1994)(74)ELT384Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Shri B.V. Kumar, the ld. advocate, for the applicants, prays for condonation of delay of 30 days in presentation of the appeal. The impugned order was communicated to the applicants on 23-7-1993. The appeal, therefore, ought to have been filed by 23-10-1993. It has, however, been filed on 24-11-1993. There is, thus, a delay of 30 days.The main ground for seeking condonation of the aforesaid delay is that the applicants' company, though incorporated under the Companies Act, is virtually defunct and is not carrying out any activity. Therefore, the impugned order received in the company came to the notice of the Directors at a very late stage. As soon as it came to the notice, the action for filing the appeal was initiated. It has also been urged that the appeal by the main company, M/s. Nihon Electronics Ltd. has been duly filed in time. It has also been heard and waiver of pre-deposit has also been ordered. In these facts and circumstances, he submits that there being no negligence ...
Crest Hotel Ltd. and Another Vs. the Assistant Superintendent of Stamp ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-04-1994
Reported in: AIR1994Bom228; 1994(4)BomCR35
ORDER1. On 7 September 1986, petitioners, Crest Hotels Ltd. entered into an agreement of sale of a flat being flat No. 121 on 1st floor of the building named 'Madhali' which was still to be constructed and open car parking space therein. It was lodged for registration with the sub-Registrar of Assurance at Bombay on 29 September, 1986. The said agreement was later on cancelled by the parties by a deed of cancellation dated 6 October, 1988. The deed of cancellation was also lodged for registration with the Sub-Registrar of Assurance at Bombay. The document of cancellation was executed on astamp paper of Rs. 10/-. The Sub-Registrar of Assurances, being of the opinion that the stamp duty prescribed under article 25 of Schedule I to the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 ('the Act') was applicable, forwarded the same to the Assistant Stamp Superintendent, Bombay. The Assistant Stamp Superintendent, Bombay held that stamp duty under Art. 258 of Schedule I to the Act was charge-able on the deed of cance...
Cricket Club of India and ors. Vs. Employees' State Insurance Corporat ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-04-1994
Reported in: (1998)IIILLJ270Bom; 1994(2)MhLj1228
1. Appellant No. 1 - The Cricket Club of India - was incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913 and was registered as a Company Limited by Guarantee, having no share capital. The Cricket Club of India was incorporated with the object to encourage and promote various sports and particularly cricket. The Club provides for tennis courts, badminton courts, squash courts, swimming pool facilities and in addition facilities for recreation and entertainment of members. Admission to the Club premises is restricted only to members and their guests. The Club is set up on a large plot of land admeasuring 83, 526 sq. yards secured from State Government on long lease. The Club had laid out cricket ground and constructed a stadium and a Club House. The Club also constructed a banquet hall. The Club has a catering department where food and beverages are prepared for consumption of members and their guests. The club has a kitchen where food is prepared and also a pantry in the swimming pool are...
Arvind Ram Swaroop Maniyar and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-04-1994
Reported in: 1995(1)BomCR234
M.S. Vaidya, J.1. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent in all the four matters, as the point involved in all these matters is common though the articles seized under the provisions of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 differ in each case.2. Heard Mr. Bora for the petitioners in all the proceedings and Mr. Choudhary, A.P.P. for the State.3. The respondent-Food Inspector of Jalgaon, on or about 19-7-1993 and 20-7-1993 seized from the four petitioners certain food articles in large quantity, on an assumption that they were adulterated articles. In each case, the Food Inspector himself exercised the jurisdiction, which in fact, does not vest in him in law, to hand over the goods in the custody of the petitioners themselves on certain bond, subject to the condition that the articles should not be sold until further orders. The samples taken from the seized articles were sent to the public analyst and some time before 2-9-1993, the reports of the public analyst, which were adver...
Vats and Vessels Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-03-1994
Reported in: (1995)(59)LC415Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Shri M. H. Patil, the learned advocate, for the applicants prayed for waiver of pre-deposit of Rs. 85,441.12 demanded as duty and of Rs. 500/- imposed as personal penalty. He submits that the sole basis for demand of duty by the lower authorities is that the applicant did not file an appeal against an order by the original authority approving the classification list and denying the benefit of Notification 175/86. The demand is for the period 1.3.1986 to September 1986. The learned advocate has submitted that this ground for demand of duty is prima facie untenable in view of settled legal position that there is no estoppel against law and the lower authorities were duty bound to reconsider the submissions of the applicants against the demand of duty, even though no appeal had been filed against approval of the classification list. He relies for this proposition on Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Plasmac Machine Mfg. Co. P. Ltd. v. CCE and in the judgment of Tribunal in the c...
Dharmaji Alias Baban Bajirao Shinde Vs. Jagannath Shankar Jadhav Since ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-03-1994
Reported in: AIR1994Bom254; 1994(1)MhLj607
1. Can a transferee file a suit for injunction Against the transferor to protect the former's possession over theland given to him as per the terms ofagreement of sale? 2. The above question of law falls for determination in this second appeal filed by the plaintiff-transferee whose suit for permanent injunction against the defendant-transferor restraining him from disturbing the lawful possession has been dismissed by the Courts below on the grounds of maintainability as well as on merits. 3. First, the question of maintainability. The lower Courts have taken a view that the doctrine of part performance incorporated in S. 53A of the Transfer of Property Act can be pressed into service only as a defence and unless and until a decree for specific performance of agreement of contract is passed in favour of the transferee, he cannot file a suit against the transferor in respect of the suit property for any purpose. I find it extremely difficult to sustain this view for the reasons that fo...
Vaz Forwarding Limited Vs. State Bank of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-03-1994
Reported in: 1995(3)BomCR673; [1996]85CompCas603(Bom)
N.D. Vyas, J.1. The petitioners are the owners of the office premises bearing No. 4, Atlanta Building, Nariman Point, Bombay-400 021. The petitioners are praying that the respondents be ordered and directed to forthwith hand over quiet, vacant and peaceful possession of the office premises to the petitioners and that the respondents be ordered and directed to pay to the petitioners a sum of Rs. 20,000 per day as mesne profits from November 24, 1991, till the date of handing over the possession of the said premises along with interest and, lastly, that the respondents be restrained by an order of permanent injunction from selling, assigning, transferring the tenancy rights in the said premises or parting with possession thereof or induction any third party therein. (a) Some time in the year 1978, a lease was execute for a period of five years between the petitioners and the Bank of Credit and commerce International (Overseas) Limited, for the said bank's office at Bombay. The said bank ...
Anjebhau S/O. Anna and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-03-1994
Reported in: 1994(4)BomCR136
N.P. Chapalgaonker, J.1. These two revision applications raise a short point as to whether persons who are the owners of the property covered by two different notifications of the even date published in the same Gazette would be entitled for the benefit under section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Since both revision applications raise common questions of fact and law, they are heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.2. Two notifications under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 bearing numbers LAQ-SR-2/80 and LAQ-SR-4/80; were published wherein an award was passed in LAQ-SR-4/80; whereas there was reference under section 18 only in respect of the award of the Collector under section 11 in furtherance of Notification No. LAQ-SR-2/80, it appears that there was no such reference made in LAQ-SR-4/80. Persons whose lands were covered by the Notification No. LAQ-SR-4/80 filed an application purporting to be under section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›