Mumbai Court November 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.
Dr. Caitan Fernandes Vs. State of Goa
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-21-1994
Reported in: 1996(2)BomCR601
E.S. Da Silva, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Special Judge, dated 30th March, 1994, in Special Criminal Case No. 19 of 1993 whereby the learned Judge has convicted the appellant for an offence under section 20(b)(ii) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called 'the Act') and sentenced him to undergo ten years of rigorous imprisonment and further to pay a fine of Rs. l,00,000/-, or in default to undergo another one year of rigorous imprisonment.2. The prosecution case is that on 17th September, 1993, on information received by the complainant that the appellant who is from Assagao and is a drug peddlar was going to sell drugs on his motor cycle. The complainant P.S.I. N.V. Mhamal along with some of his staff including the Assistant Superintendent of Police Gautam and two panch witnesses namely Edie Gonsalves and Sudhir Deshpande, both Government employees proceeded in a jeep to Assagao near the house of the appellant...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shri N.K. Mehra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-17-1994
Reported in: [1995]213ITR582(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J. 1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, made at the instance of the Revenue the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay, Bench 'B', Bombay, has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has rightly held that the salary income of the assessee from Savita Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. is assessable in the hands of the assessee in the status of individual' (sic) for each of the assessment years under consideration ?' 2. The assessee, Shri N. K. Mehra, was director of a company known as Savita Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. for which he received salary from the said company. In his individual assessments for the assessment years 1972-73, 1973-74 and 1974-75, the assessee claimed before the Income-tax Officer that the above salary was assessable in the hands of the 'Hindu undivided family of Shri N. K. Mehra' of which he was the karta and not in ...
Varun Polymol Organics Ltd. and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra and O ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-17-1994
Reported in: 1995(3)BomCR502
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. The 1st petitioner herein has set up a manufacturing unit at MIDC, Mahad, an underdeveloped area of the State of Maharashtra in district Raigad manufacturing pesticides covered under entry 31 of Schedule C, Part II appended to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. The 1st petitioner has several branches within the State as well as outside the State. The 1st petitioner holds registration certificates under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 as well as the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The 2nd petitioner is the director of the 1st petitioner-company and is a citizen of India. The above referred unit of the 1st petitioner is an eligible unit duly covered under 1983 Package Scheme of incentives introduced by the Government of Maharashtra. The 1st petitioner has complied with all the conditions of eligibility prescribed by the said scheme. By virtue of the provisions contained in the said scheme as well as entry 136 of relevant exemption notification issued by the Government of Maha...
Shri Umakant B. Kenkre and anr. Vs. Communidade of Priol Through the A ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-17-1994
Reported in: 1996(5)BomCR209
T.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. The plaintiffs in a suit for declaration of the ownership of the suit property filed this revision petition. In the said suit the allegation is that the defendant No. 2 is interfering with the properties. Defendant No. 2 pleaded that he is tenant of the property. Issues have been framed on the basis of the pleadings of the respective parties. Issue No. 4 was framed on the basis of the pleadings by the defendant as follows:---'Whether the defendant No. 2 proves that the property 'Bhatiem' surveyed under No. 55/6 and 55/7 belongs to Communidade of Priol and he is in possession of the same as lawful tenant?'Whereas the issues based on the pleadings of the plaintiffs has been framed as issue no. 2 as follows:-'Whether the plaintiffs prove that apart from Dr. Purshottam Kuvelkar and Shri Bhalchandra Kenkre and their heirs, no other person or body had any right or title in respect of the suit property which is surveyed under No. 55/7?'Admittedly these two issue...
Bombay Mercantile Co-operative Bank Limited Vs. Akbarali and Sons and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-17-1994
Reported in: 1995(3)BomCR605; (1995)97BOMLR240
A.V. Savant, J.1. On a motion made by Mr. Naik, the names of respondents Nos. 4 & 5 viz. the two Courts below are deleted.2. This writ petition by the Bombay Mercantile Co-op. Bank Ltd., Bombay, demonstrates how the delay in disposal of cases can help a businessman to the prejudice of a Bank. The order impugned in this petition is the one dated 31st January, 1991 passed by Shri R.S. Dargode, the then Member of the Maharashtra State Co-operative Appellate Court, Bombay, in Appeal No.421 of 1990. Under the said Order, the learned Member allowed the appeal of the first three respondents (original opponents). In the result, the Order dt. 9th October, 1990 passed by the learned trial Judge of the Co-operative Court, Bombay, in Case No.C.C.I./1057 of 1990 granting conditional leave to defend on the said three respondents depositing a sum of Rs.75,00,000/- within one month, has been set aside.3. The suit filed by the petitioner-Bank in the year 1990, is for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,12,34,267...
Peter Joseph Bhonsale, Since Deceased by His Heirs Vs. Poona Diocesan ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-17-1994
Reported in: 1995(3)BomCR540
A.V. Savant, J.1. This is a petition by the tenant under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the concurrent findings of fact that the monthly rent of the premises in dispute was Rs. 50/- and that for a period of nearly four years, the petitioner tenant had failed and neglected to make payment of the rent and continued to do so until after expiration of the period of one month after the notice under sub-section (2) of section 12 of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, (for short the said Rent Act) was served on him. In short, there is a concurrent finding against the petitioner-tenant that he is defaulter and that his case is covered by the unamended provisions of section 12(3)(a) of the said Rent Act. The relevant facts may be stated as under :2. The premises in dispute are a part of a bunglow, at 16, Ahmednagar Road, Pune. The original petitioner - Peter Joseph Bhonsale, since deceased, claimed to be the tenant since 1950. The premises co...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Prabhu Barku Gade
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-1994
Reported in: 1995(2)BomCR188; 1995CriLJ1432
Sahai, J.1. Since both these matters arise out of the same set of facts, we propose disposing them of by a common judgment. 2. Vide Judgment and Order dated 3rd May, 1994, the Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Sessions Case No. 142 of 1993, sentenced the appellant under Section 302, IPC to death for committing the murders of Smt. Mirabai Govind Gade and Baburao Dhondiba Gade. The order convicting the appellant under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code was passed by him on 30th April, 1994. It is this conviction and sentence which has been challenged in the present appeal. Clubbed along with this appeal is Confirmation Case No. 1 of 1994, which arises out of the reference made by the learned trial Judge, under Section 366 of Criminal Procedure Code, for confirmation of the death sentence of the appellant. 3. The prosecution case in brief, is that the appellant Prabhu Barku Gade is the first cousin of the informant Govind Baburao Gade, who was the husband of Smt. Mirabai Govind Gade, o...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Arvindkumar Odhavji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-1994
Reported in: [1995]213ITR551(Bom)
S.M. Jhunjhunuwala J. 1. By this reference filed under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the rent income received from the Vijaya Bank as per lease agreement for 15 years was liable to be assessed as 'business' income and not as income from 'other sources' for the assessment year 1976-77 ?' 2. The assessee is an individual who had income from property as well as business. The assessee carried on business in partnership with others in rented premises. According to the assessee, the assessee was not doing well in the business carried on in partnership as a result whereof, the assessee suffered substantial losses and in order to save the losses and reduce the indebtedness, the assessee thought of letting out the premises where the business was carried on, on sub-lease. The assessee entered into an ag...
Gangadhar Narsingdas Agrawal (Huf) Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-1994
Reported in: (1995)125CTR(Bom)253; [1996]217ITR665(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following questions at the instance of the assessee to this court for opinion: '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was not entitled to claim deduction of interest paid to the relatives of G. N. Agarwal on the ground that the amount on which interest was paid came out of invalid gifts? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the jetty charges on barge loading expenses paid to Mahesh and Rajiv Mor were not allowable business expenditure? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was not entitled to claim deduction on account of gratuity liability on the ground that the provisions of section 40A(7) have not been complied with? 4. Whether, on the facts...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. London Star Diamond Co. (i) Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-15-1994
Reported in: [1995]213ITR517(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference made under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, made at the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion : 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was an industrial company within the meaning of section 2(8) of the Finance Act, 1975 ?' 2. This reference pertains to the assessment year 1975-76. The assessee is a limited company which deals in diamonds. Its main activities comprise import of raw diamonds and after cutting and polishing the same, export thereof out of India. The assessee claimed to be an 'industrial company' within the meaning of section 2(8) (c) of the Finance Act, 1975. This claim of the assessee was rejected by the Income-tax Officer. The assessee appealed against the above order to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who accepted the contention of the assesse...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »