Mumbai Court December 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.
Shamsunder Kaka Talkar Since Deceased Through His Legal Heirs Vs. Rent ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-16-1994
Reported in: 1996(4)BomCR39
T.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. The petitioners challenge the judgment and order dated 21-6-1990 passed by the Administrative Tribunal, Goa, Daman and Diu, Panaji in Eviction Appeal No. 47/81 and the order passed in Misc. Application dated 17-11-1982 filed by respondent No. 3 under section 32 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction), Control Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and also the order passed by the Rent Controller dated 27-4-1981.2. The respondent No. 3 are the owners of the building known as Keni Hotel who let out the building in question to M/s. S.G. Enterprises, a partnership firm of which Shamsunder Kaka Talkar and Ganpat Shivaji Naik (respondent No. 4) were the partners. The suit building is shop No. 5 in Keni Hotel. The rate of rent payable by the tenant as per the contract was Rs. 235/- per month. In 1978 the third respondent filed a suit for eviction before the Rent Controller, Goa, North Division, Panaji against M/s. Shamsunder Kaka T...
United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Madgavkar Salvage and Towage C ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-16-1994
Reported in: 1996(4)BomCR50; (1995)97BOMLR101
T.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. Petitioners are the defendants. Suit is filed against them for recovery of money allegedly due under insurance policy on account of the sinking of the ship 'Sayremar Dos' on 5th June, 1988. The petitioner alleges in this application as follows:2. Suit was filed on 18th May, 1990. Alongwith the plaint certain documents were filed by the plaintiffs. On 3rd July, 1990 the petitioners filed their written statement. On 19th July, 1990 the respondents filed their list of two documents. The said application was granted by the Court. On 15th September, 1990 the respondents filed another list of 21 documents seeking leave to tender them in evidence. The ground alleged for delay in filing the documents was due to oversight. The Lower Court granted that application also.3. The suit came up for trial on 15th September, 1990. The examination-in-chief of the plaintiff's first witness, namely, Anil V. Madgaokar, started. Then the counsel for the respondents sought to te...
Shri Kamlakant D. Naik Vs. the Collector of North Goa and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-16-1994
Reported in: 1996(3)BomCR131
A.P. Shah, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution raises some interesting questions relating to the interpretation of provisions of the Goa Panchayat Raj Ordinance, 1994 (for short 'the Ordinance') which was holding the field only for a short while from April 20, 1994 till July 9, 1994 when it was replaced by the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short 'the Act'). The facts leading up to this petition may be briefly narrated before examining the questions raised in this petition.2. Respondent No. 4 is a Village Panchayat established under section 3 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Village Panchayats Regulation, 1962 (for short 'the Regulation of 1962'). The said Panchayat consists of 9 members. The petitioner and the respondent Nos. 5 to 12 are the members of respondent No. 4. The petitioner was elected as Sarpanch, that is, Chairman of respondent No. 4 on April 6, 1992.3. Seven members of respondent No. 4, namely, respondent Nos. 5 to 11, gave a notice of motion of no-c...
Radhyesham S/O Ramkisan Chandak and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-15-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2195; 1995(1)MhLj741
L. Manoharan, J.1. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence awarded by the Additional Sessions Judge, Achalpur, in Sessions Case No. 118/86 (new Sessions Case No. 174/91), to the accused Nos. 1 and 2, they have come up, in this appeal. The charge sheet was submitted against five accused persons alleging that on 16-5-1984, accused No. 1, the elder brother and the accused No. 2, the younger one, committed murder of Tara, alias Vijaya, 32 years, wife of second accused, between 10.30 a.m. and 2.00 p.m. on 16-5-1984 in the first floor room of their mansion; they assaulted Tara, then set her on fire and threw her in the well situated in the compound of the said mansion. One of the accused, the wife of the first accused, expired before the charge was framed. The third accused Yeshwant, alias Motiram, died after the framing of the charge.2. Accused Nos. 1 and 2 were charged under Sections 302 and 201, read with Section 34 I.P.C. and accused Nos. 3 and 4 were charged under Sections 201 and 203 ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ratanabad Co-operative Housing Society ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-15-1994
Reported in: [1995]215ITR549(Bom)
S.M. Jhunjhunuwala, J.1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for its opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has rightly held that the income of the assessee from letting out shops to persons other than its members is exempt from tax under section 80P(2)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The assessee is a co-operative society. As per bye-law 80A of the bye-laws of the assessee-society, certain shops constructed by the assessee-society were not to be sold but were to be let out on leave and licence basis to help maintenance of the assessee-society. In the assessment years 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1978-79, the assessee-society did derive income from letting of shops to persons other than its Members. In the course of the assessment proceedings for the said assessment years, the assessee-society contended...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Vipinchandra C. Sanghavi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-15-1994
Reported in: [1995]215ITR753(Bom)
S.M. Jhunjhunuwala, J. 1. By this reference filed under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following questions of law have been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the Revenue : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the share profit of the assessee's spouse Smt. Lina V. Sanghavi, from the firm of Ashit Constructions, Pune, is not includible under section 64(1)(i) of the Act, in the assessment of the assessee 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in cancelling the Commissioner's order under section 263 of the Act ?' 2. This reference relates to the assessment year 1975-76. 3. The assessee was a partner in the firm of Messrs. Ashit Construction in his representative capacity as karta of his Hindu undivided family. Smt. L. V. Sanghavi, the wife of the assessee, was also a partner in the said firm in her ind...
S.M. Chemicals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-ta ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-15-1994
Reported in: (1995)125CTR(Bom)319; [1995]215ITR943(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J. 1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench 'B', Bombay ('the Tribunal'), has referred the following two questions of law to this court for opinion : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the claim of the assessee for allowance of development rebate of Rs. 3,50,128 for the assessment year 1975-76 has been rightly rejected 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the claim of the assessee for allowance of investment allowance of Rs. 31,000 for the assessment year 1977-78 has been rightly rejected ?' 2. The material facts giving rise to this reference are as follows : The assessee is a private limited company. This reference pertains to the assessment years 1975-76 and 1977-78. By a deed of sale dated February 28, 1977, effective from March 1, 1977, the assessee-company sold its entire business undertaking consisting of Sarabhai M. Che...
Collector of Customs Vs. Analog and Digital Measurement
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-14-1994
Reported in: (1995)(56)LC667Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Collector of Customs, Bombay has filed the following three appeals being aggrieved from the order passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay:Appeal No. Date of receipt of Date of filing of Delay impugned order appealC/1181/85-B2 21.3.1985 11.7.1985 19 daysC/1263/85-B2 9.4.1985 17.7.1985 7 daysC/1441/85-B2 21.3.1985 2.8.1985 41 days 2. Shri K.K. Jha, the learned SDR is present on behalf of the appellant. Nobody has appeared on behalf of the respondents. The respondents have written for adjournment. We do not find any justification for adjournment. We reject their request and proceed to decide the matter ex-parte. Shri K.K. Jha, the learned SDR pleaded that first the applications for condonation of delay may be taken up. In support of the same, he pleaded that the delay in the filing of the appeal has occurred on account of the fact that the technical points were considered by the Department at length. He pleaded that if the delay is not condoned, there will be loss of reve...
M/S. Dinshaw and Dinshaw and Others Vs. Indoswe Engineers Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-14-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Bom180; 1995(3)BomCR548
1. This is an appeal against the judgment and decrees dated 26th October, 1978 in Special Civil Suit No. 215 of 1972 on the file of Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune. I have heard, the learned Counsel appearing for both the parties.2. The appellants-plaintiffs filed a suit in the trial Court for recovery of money in respect of a building contract. The plaintiffs' case is that defendant company entrusted construction of a bangalow and a factory to the plaintiffs. It appears the construction had been done by a previous contractor and then work was entrusted to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs submitted their estimates and also rates which were accepted by defendant with some modification. The work was entrusted to the plaintiffs sometime in February 1970. It is also plaintiffs' case that part of the work done by previous contractor was not of good quality and the matter was examined by the Architect Mr. Nene. When the work was in progress, the defendant also entrusted some additiona...
Chubby Ekwealcoh Vs. V.A.K. Sekar, Asstt. Collector of Customs, Bombay ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-14-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2238
P.S. Patankar, J.1. The Appellant herein came to be convicted by the learned Special Judge, Greater Bombay in Sessions Case No. 1033 of 1987 dated 23-2-1993 under Section 21 read with Section 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereafter called 'the Act') and sentenced to suffer r/i for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- in default to suffer further r/i for 6 months. The Appellant also came to be convicted for an offence punishable under Section 23 read with Section 28 of NDPS Act 1985 and for the offence punishable under Section 135(1)(a) read with Section 135(1)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962. However no such separate sentence was awarded. The same is under challenge in his appeal.2. The prosecution case in nut-shell was as follows :- On 11-8-1987 at 2.15 a.m. officers of Air Intelligence Unit of Customs Department posted at Sahar International Air Port Bombay on suspicion intercepted the Appellant, a Nigerian, bound for Addis Ababa by Ethiopion Ai...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »