Mumbai Court February 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.
Pandey Ajay Bhushan, Collector and District Magistrate, Jalgaon and Ot ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-10-1994
Reported in: 1994CriLJ1726
ORDER1. The present petitioners were accused Nos. 1, 3 and 4 in Criminal Case No. 194/1993 which was initially numbered before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalgaon as Criminal Misc. Application No. 187/1993.The petitioners are the Collector and District Magistrate, the Additional Superintendent of Police and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jalgaon, respectively. The private complaint in question was filed by respondent No. 1 who happens to be the President of the Jalgaon Municipal Council.2. The unfortunate conflict between the aforesaid authorities had arisen because of certain move adopted by the complainant for demolition of the encroachments on public properties located at Jalgaon. There was a lot of commotion over that issue as a result of which, according to the petitioners, they had to intervene for maintenance of law and order in discharge of their respective official duties. It is averred in the complaint lodged by respondent No. 1 that when a particular encroachment was bein...
Bombay Tyres International Ltd. Vs. Maharashtra General Kamgar Union a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-10-1994
Reported in: [1994(68)FLR799]
Bhimrao N. Naik, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Rule. By consent of the parties, Rule made returnable forthwith. Respondent waive service. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties in extenso. Respondent - Trade Union filed Complain (ULP) No. 1359 of 1993 alleging that the petitioner-company has engaged in or being engaging in unfair labour practices under Items 9 and 6 of Schedule IV and Items 1 and 6 of Schedule II of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as MRTU and PULP Act for the sake of brevity). This complaint was filed on 16th December, 1993. The main prayers in the complaint are as follows :- (a) direct the Company to resume the Badli scheme and/or provide the work to badli employees as before discontinuation of the same; (b) direct the company to pay full wages for the down time to the concerned employees; (c) restrain the company from resorting to lock-out and/or temporary or per...
G.K. Sengupta Vs. Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-10-1994
Reported in: 1994(4)BomCR230; [1994(68)FLR1117]
B.P. Saraf, J. 1. By this writ petition, the petitioner workman has challenged the order of the Industrial Tribunal, Bombay dated 9 July, 1991 under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Act) granting approval to the order of discharge of the petitioner G. K. Sengupta from service. The main ground of challenge is that the said order was passed without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner on the merits of the case. The decision will depend on proper appreciation of the nature of the power of the Labour Court under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act and the scope and ambit of the enquiry for that purpose. 2. The petitioner was employed in the establishment of the respondent company as a Junior Clerk on 1 June, 1967. He was promoted as Senior Clerk in 1982. He was working in the Equipment Division. On 21 November 1985 the petitioner was served with a show cause notice. In the said notice it was alleged that on 11 November, 1985 at about 11.30 A.M. the petitioner a...
Zenith Bearing Enterprises Vs. Collector of Customs (Acc)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1994
Reported in: (1995)(75)ELT801Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal directed against the order passed by the Collector (Appeals) bearing No. S/49-58/90 Misc (Air) dated 28-9-1990 rejecting the appellants' appeal.The appellants, herein, had imported a consignment of ball and roller bearings and filed Bill of Entry on 24-1-1989. The examination of the goods took place on 1-2-1989 when the goods were found to be in order.Thereafter, duty has been paid on the goods on 29-3-1989. After the payment of duty, the proper officer gave the out of charge order on 31-3-1989. When the appellants went to take delivery of the consignment on 3-4-1989, they found the packages in torn condition and one package was found missing. Thereafter, they had a survey done by M/s. Lloyds Agencies Tata Tea Ltd. The Customs was not associated in the survey.However, the survey was reported to have been done in the premises of the custodian viz. International Airport Authority of India in the Customs' area. They, thereafter, filed refund claim in respect of the g...
East Metals Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1994
Reported in: (1994)(74)ELT329Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal against the order-in-original No. CAO/No.16/OCT/93 CAC(S/10-53/93IV), dated 10-9-1993. In the aforesaid order, no confiscation or imposition of penalty has been ordered against anyone. The appellants herein are foreign suppliers of brass scrap and they claimed reshipment of the goods, which was not agreed to by the Collector. He did not permit reshipment of the goods but ordered that action under Section 48 of the Customs Act may be resorted with regard to the goods. One M/s. Arcee Exports, imported a consignment of brass scrap and filed B/E on 31-3-1992. However, on account of some reported financial constraints, they did not retire the documents from the bank and on 4-7-1992 they surrendered the B/E to the Customs, after informing them that they are not in a position to take delivery of the goods, on account of financial stringency. Thereupon, the appellants, herein re-drew the documents in favour of M/s. Sahil International, who sought for permission to clear t...
United Accumulators Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs and Central
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1994
Reported in: (1994)(53)LC125Tri(Mum.)bai
1. For hearing the applicants' appeal on merits, they are required to deposit a sum of Rs. 5,05,551 towards duty and a penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs, vide order in original No. 6/C/C. Ex. Goa/93 dated 30.9.1993.2. Shri Maingi, the ld. advocate, appearing for the applicants, pleads that though they have taken over M/s. Union Storage Energy, who are alleged to be not eligible for exemption under Not. No. 175/86 during 1987-90, they cannot be fastened with penalty when there is no notice to them with regard to the penalty. Even with regard to the duty demand in respect of the clearances effected by M/s. Union Storage Energy, the demand is time barred, because the show cause notice was dated 30.4.1992 covering the period 1987 to 1990.3. Shri Harnek Sinch (sic) the ld. JDR, on the other hand, however, points out that M/s. Union Storage Energy have not declared their manufacturing activity and claimed the benefit of exemption under Notfn. No. 175/86 and their value of clearance has exceeded the pr...
Bhavarlal Sukhalal Soni, Since Deceased by His Heirs and Legal Represe ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1994
Reported in: AIR1994Bom175; 1994(4)BomCR209; (1994)96BOMLR700; 1994(1)MhLj843
ORDERV. A. Mohta, J.1. This is a reference by the learned single Judge (Srikrishna, J.) to resolve the conflict of opinion as to interpretation of Section 13(1)(1) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (the Act).2. In Gajanand v. Rashtriya Girni Kamgar Sangh, : 1982(1)BomCR259 (R.A. Jahaglrdar, J.) and in Dattatraya Pandi kharote v. Pandurang Maruti Jadhav, 1991 Bom 60 (Ashok Agarwal, J.) have held that the provision applies only to the premises taken on lease for residential use. In Madhukar Vishnu Sathe v. Vithoba Ramji Thorat, : AIR1992Bom272 (V. V. Kamat, J.) has taken a view that the provision would apply also to premises taken for commercial use.3. Factual matrix lies in a narrow compass and it is this: Lakshminarayan Deo Public Trust, Swaminarayan Mandir, Dhule (the Landlord) had let out for commercial use the shop premises to deceased Bhavarlal Sukhlal Soni (tenant). The tenant secured another commercial premises in the town and on that basis a su...
Osman Khan S/O Abdul Majid Khan and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1994
Reported in: AIR1994Bom271; 1994(3)BomCR333; (1994)96BOMLR873
ORDERA. D. Mane, J.1. This appeal arises out of the Land Acquisition Reference No. 66 of 1984 decided on 18-8-1987, by the 2nd Additional District Judge, Aurangabad.2. The Appellants are the claimants. They have together 2/3rd share in the land forming part of CTS No. 19049/1 admeasuring 8809 sq. mts situated at Padampura, Aurangabad, Railway Station, Aurangabad. The said land came to be acquired for the purpose of development of Railway road in Marathwada area to merge Meter Guage line passing from Manmad to Kachiguda through Aurangabad Centre into Broad Gauge line. The notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 (for short, the Act) which was published in the Maharashtra Government Gazette on 21-1-1862 by applying the urgent clause. The notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 23-3-1982 which was published in the Maharashtra Government Gazette on 8-4-1982. The Special Land Acquisition Officer passed the Award on 23-2-1984. The Special Land Acquisiti...
Narayan Iranna Potkanthi Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1994
Reported in: 1994CriLJ1752
ORDER1. The Assistant Sessions Judge, Nanded, had convicted the present revision-petitioner of an offence punishable under S. 376 of the Indian Penal Code, in Sessions Case No. 37/1990 and had sentenced him to suffer R.I. for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to suffer further R.I. for three months. An Appeal was carried in Criminal Appeal No. 46/90 to the Sessions Judge and the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded dismissed that appeal on 16-1-1993. The revision-petitioner was, then, taken in custody for undergoing the sentence. It was through Jail that he had sent a letter-cum-appeal to this Court for considering the matter because, according to him, the decision of the case was not correct according to the true facts and the Courts below had not given him a proper chance to submit his evidence. It was also contended that the decision was given without hearing his side and that the sentence was awarded merely on suspicion.2. In view of the gravity of th...
Sadanand Alias Sadu Alias Sada Vasudeo Shetty Vs. A.S. Samra, Commissi ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1994
Reported in: 1994(4)BomCR123
P.S. Patankar, J.1. This Petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the detenu challenging the order dated 16th August, 1993 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Greater Bombay, under Section 3 sub-section (2) of the National Security Act, 1980. The order came to be passed against the detenu with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The grounds of detention were served on the detenu pari passu. 2. Considering the two points raised by the learned Advocate for the detenu, it is not necessary to state in detail the grounds on which the detenu came to be detained. However, in nutshell, they are as follows :- 3. The ground 2 shows that the detenu is a gang leader and a weapon wielding desperado, committed heinous crimes by using weapons like swords, revolver and choppers. He has created a reign of terror in the minds of the public in the localities of Ravalpada, S. N. Dube Marg, Maratha Colony and adjoin...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »