Mumbai Court October 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.
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. P.T. Vijayan and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-21-1994
Reported in: (1995)IILLJ954Bom
B.P. Saraf, J. 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Controlling Authority dated July 25, 1990 under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 directing payment of simple interest @ 10 per cent on the amount of gratuity payable under Sub-section (3A) of Section 3 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 ('The Act') with effect from July 1, 1977 till the end of May, 1988 for a period of 10 years, 10 months and 29 days amounting to Rs. 7,615.00 and the order of the Appellate Authority under the said Act dated June 1, 1992 on appeal against the said order under Sub-section (7) of Section 7 of the Act, confirming the above order and dismissing the appeal. 2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are as under:The respondent, P.T.Vijayan was working with the petitioner from July 26, 1954. He superannuated from service on June 30, 1977. Onsuperannuation, he was entitled to gratuity under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act. A sum of Rs. 6,923.07 was paid to him by way of gratuity ...
Nikhil Arvind Bavdekar Vs. Shivaji University and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-21-1994
Reported in: 1995(2)BomCR686
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. Sometime in the month of June, 1990 the petitioner was admitted to the First Year M.B.B.S. Degree Course in D.Y. Patil Medical College, Kolhapur. The petitioner was due to appear for the Ist Year M.B.B.S. Examination in the month of October 1991. The petitioner did not appear at the said examination. The petitioner did not appear for the Ist M.B.B.S. Examination held in the month of April 1992 as well as in the Examination for the said course held in the month of October 1992. Sometime in the month of April 1993, the petitioner appeared in the examination for the Ist Year M.B.B.S. Course. The petitioner failed at the said examination. The petitioner had four chances to appear at the said examination during a period of three years. The petitioner did not avail of three chances. The petitioner availed of the fourth chance and failed as indicated above. The petitioner could not clear Ist M.B.B.S. examination during a period of three years inspite of four opportunities b...
Asif Abdul Gafoor Shaikh and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-21-1994
Reported in: 1995(3)BomCR153
S.S. Dani, J.1. Heard Shri Kudle, Counsel for the petitioners and Shri Nayak, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.2. Perused the original record of Criminal Bail Application No. 261 of 1994 as well as the investigation papers.3. These three petitioners are alleged to have committed offences punishable under sections 420, 489-D read with 34, Indian Penal Code registered against them at Omerga Police Station. District Osmanabad at Crime No. 2 of 1994. Their Bail Application No. 261 of 1994 came to be rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge, Osmanabad on 16-4-1994. Hence this application.4. It is alleged by the prosecution that on 29-12-1993 three persons, namely, Jagannath Kamble, Mappanna Harnur and Bharat Sutkar represented one Diwakar Shetty, proprietor of Hotel Vrindavan that if an amount of Rs. l,00,000/- is paid they will return Rs. 3,00,000/-. It is further alleged that said Mr. Diwakar Shetty then parted with an amount of Rs. 48.000/- on hope of receiving the amount in t...
Vasant Rajaram Narvekar, Since Deceased by His Legal Heirs Vs. Ankusha ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-21-1994
Reported in: 1995(3)BomCR196
S.D. Pandit, J.1. Shri Vasant Rajaram Narvekar, the original plaintiff in Regular Civil Suit No. 71 of 1975 on the file of Civil Judge Junior Division. Malvan. District - Sindhudurga has preferred this Second Appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the Assistant Judge, Ratnagiri in Civil Appeal No. 113 of 1978 on 17th April. 1984.2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under :The present appellant Shri Vasant Rajaram Narvekar is son of Shri Rajaram Laxman Narvekar. Smt. Bhagirathi is the wife of the said Rajaram Laxman Narvekar. Defendant No. 1 Ankush, defendant No. 9 Yashwant and defendant No. 10 Prabhakar are brothers of the appellant Vasant Rajaram-Narvekar and they are sons of Rajaram and Bhagirathi Rajaram Narvekar. These four brothers have got 2 sisters by name Asha and Gulab. Asha was married to Sitaram Phansekar. She lost her husband in the year 1950 and then she returned to her parental house and she entered the witness box as P.W. 1 as the plaintiff's w...
Diamant Boart India (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-20-1994
Reported in: (1995)LC613Tri(Mum.)bai
1. For hearing the applicant's appeal on merits, they are required to deposit a sum of Rs. 45,34,925 towards duty vide order in appeal No.NK(73) Goa-16/642/94 dated 23-8-1994.2. Shri Maingi, the ld. advocate, appearing for the applicants, pleaded that they were availing concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 207/88-C.E. in accordance with the approved classification list.However, the Department held that the exemption is available only to the complete items and not to the parts, because parts are not specifically mentioned in the notification. Subsequently, the Government have rectified the defect by issuing amendment to the Notification covering the entire item. Though the demands are within time limit, there is a likelihood of Section 11C Notification being issued. He also pleaded that the amount of duty has not been recovered from the customers and when there is an established practice, even the demand for six months cannot be sustained as per the decision of the Tribunal...
Dipak Ray and ors. Vs. Mafatlal Engineering Employees Union and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-20-1994
Reported in: 1995(2)BomCR216; [1995(70)FLR593]; 1995(2)MhLj149
B.N. Srikrishna, J. 1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order dated 8th December, 1987, made by the Industrial Court, Thane, in Revision Application (ULP) No. 83 of 1987, under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The crucial issue in the present writ petition is whether a Director or Officer of a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 can be liable for contravention of an order passed under the provisions of the Act even though such Director of Officer was not party to the proceedings in which the order was passed, despite there being no provision in the Act imposing such vicarious penal liability on a Director or Officer of a limited Company for the default of a limited Company. 3. The First Petitioner is the Executive Director, the Second Petitioner the General Manager (Operations) and the Third Petitioner ...
Mansing Bajirao Sawant Vs. Waman Laxman Sawant
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-20-1994
Reported in: 1995(1)BomCR645
S.D. Pandit, J.1. Mansing Bajirao Sawant, original defendant in Regular Civil Suit No. 172 of 1977 on the file of II Jt. Civil Judge, Satara has come in the Second Appeal before this Court.2. Before considering the pleadings of the parties, it is necessary for to me give pedigree of the original plaintiff and original holder of the lands in dispute, which is as under :Chimaji Sawant was the owner of all the eleven pieces of lands which are described by the respondent-plaintiff Waman in his plaint in Regular Civil Suit No. 172 of 1977. The said Chimaji Sawant died in the year 1953 leaving behind him his four sons Ramu, Laxman, Arjun and Bapu. His eldest son Ramu died in the year 1960, leaving behind him his widow Manjulabai and his son Kisan. Thus, Kisan and Ramu and Manjulabai Ramu are cousin brothers and paternal aunt of respondent-plaintiff Waman Laxman Sawant.3. Kisan Ramu Sawant entered into a transaction with the present appellant Mansing Bajirao Sawant on 18th June, 1965 and Kisa...
Patel Management Consultancy Vs. Assistant Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-19-1994
Reported in: (1995)52ITD15(Mum.)
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner (A) VI, Bombay dated 23-9-1992. The only question involved in this appeal is whether the loss sustained by the assessee can be carried forward to the next year for being set off. For assessment year 1987-88 the assessee, which is a private limited company, had filed its income-tax return on 29-7-1987 showing a loss of Rs. 93,585. Along with the return the profit and loss account and the balance sheet, which have been audited were filed. The company was incorporated on 19-3-1986. The accounts of the company were closed for the first time on 31-12-1986. The accounts for the assessment year 1987-88 were therefore prepared for the period from 19-3-1986 to 31-12-1986. The objects of the company were inter alia, to carry on the profession of consultancy, advisors and also carry on the business of underwriting, to subscribe, acquire, take up and hold shares, stocks, debentures and securities issued by any compan...
G.D. Shinde. Vs. Associated Cement Cos. Ltd. and ors
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-19-1994
Reported in: [1995(70)FLR541]; (1995)ILLJ1245Bom
B.N. Srikrishna, J 1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India impugns an order of the First Labour Court, Thane, dated 31st July, 1987 made in Complaint (ULP) No. 22 of 1984, under the provisions of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The petitioner applied to the First Respondent for appointment as a Watchman in its service. After a successful interview by the Recruitment Committee, the First Respondent, by a letter of appointment dated 16th October, 1976, appointed the petitioner as a Watchman temporarily for a period of three months from 1st October, 1976. The basic salary payable at that time was Rs. 275/- per months in addition to the Dearness Allowance payable under the applicable rules. By a letter dated 2nd January, 1978, the petitioner, was confirmed in service as a watchman with effect from 1st January, 1978 and was fitted in the CATAD Grade 'F'...
Maruti Damu Patil Vs. Dudhganga Vedganga Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-19-1994
Reported in: (1997)IIILLJ773Bom
1. This Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India impugns an order of the Industrial Court, Kolhapur, dated September 2, 1987, made in Appeal (IC) No. 16 of 1986 and Appeal (IC) No. 17 of 1986, under the provisions of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The First Respondent is a sugar manufacturing concern covered under the provisions of the Act. The Petitioner was employed as a Clerk in the factory of the First Respondent. He was last drawing a wage of Rs. 792 per month. He was removed from service with effect from November 19, 1982 by an Order dated November 1, 1983, on the ground that he had remained absent unauthorisedly from November 19, 1982 and that a Memo dated December 6, 1982 sent at his residential address had been returned unserved. By the Order dated January 1, 1983, the Petitioner was informed that he had been removed from service with effect from November 19, 1982 from which date he was said to have ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »