Mumbai Court March 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.
Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur Vs. Deputy Commiss ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-02-1994
Reported in: [1995(70)FLR354]; (1995)ILLJ8Bom; 1994(2)MhLj1521
1. The question, that is to be considered in this writ petition, is whether the reference made by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour by his order dated 26-2-1993, holding that there is an industrial dispute and referring the dispute to the Labour Court, was valid and legal in law? 2. The following facts would highlight the controversy : The petition is by the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur, the employer. Respondent No. 2, who was working as a Junior Assistant in the Primary Health Centre, which is run by the Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur, was proceeded against by instituting a Departmental Enquiry against him on the allegations that while discharging his duties, he committed certain misappropriations. The preliminary enquiry confirmed that there was prima facie evidence regarding the said misappropriations. Not only this, but ultimately the delinquent-respondent No. 2 admitted that he had committed those misappropriations. A full Departmental Enquiry was ordered and ul...
Mohan Ganpat Nikam Vs. National Textile Corporation (South Maharashtra ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-02-1994
Reported in: 1995(1)BomCR80; (1994)IILLJ985Bom
B.P. Saraf, J.1. The petitioner Mohan Ganpat Nikam was employed with the respondent No. 1 since the year 1973. He was employed as a clerk and working in the P. F. Section. On 1 September 1985, a charge-sheet was served on him by the employer alleging that on 29 August 1985 at about 3.15 p.m., he went to the weaving shed and caught hold of the shirt of a jobber there, abused and pushed him and dragged him out of the weaving shed in the presence of the workers and questioned him in loud voice why he had abused his leader. The petitioner was charged with commission of misconduct under Standing Order 12 (k). The petitioner submitted his explanation on 3 September 1985 and denied the charge. An enquiry was conducted. The inquiry officer found him guilty of misconduct under Standing Order 12 (k). On the basis of the report of the inquiry officer, the petitioner was dismissed from service by the employer by order dated 20th January, 1986. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal, the petitioner fi...
National Textile Corporation, (South Maharashtra) Ltd. Vs. P. Gama (Mr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-02-1994
Reported in: 1994(4)BomCR613; [1995(70)FLR567]
B.P. Saraf, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by National Textile Corporation Ltd., Bombay under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment and order of the Industrial Court, Maharashtra dated 11th July 1990 in Appeal I.C. No. 149 of 1989 setting aside the order of the Labour Court under section 78 read with section 42(4) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 and holding hat the respondent No. 1 was entitled to the relief of reinstatement as also half the wages for the period from 30 March 1985 till the date of her reinstatement in her original job. 2. Briefly stated, the material facts of the case are as follows : Respondent No. 1. Mrs. P. Gama, was employed in the underrating of respondent No. 2 in the year 1966 and since then she was working as a permanent semi clerk. In the month of January 1982 there was a strike in the Mill of respondent No. 2 The petitioner was a member of Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh who were on strike. She was also...
Bhika Cullianji and Co. Vs. Avon Electric Company and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-02-1994
Reported in: 1995(1)BomCR377; (1994)96BOMLR621
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. The appellants before us were the original plaintiffs in Bombay City Civil Court Suit No. 3904 of 1962. The dispute that is the subject-matter of the litigation consists of part of Block No. 7, Devakaran Mansion, 24, Vithaldas Road, Bombay - 400 002. The original plaintiffs claim to be the tenants in respect of the premises which are business premises and consist of five rooms, apart from a common passage, toilet, etc. We are not very much concerned with several of the ancillary arrangements to which there is a reference in the course of the proceedings, but the present two parties have effectively agitated the litigation in relation to one of these five rooms which is identified as room B in the plan which is at page 76 of the compilation. We need to mention that the plaintiffs had entered into a series of agreements with the defendants starting from 29-10-1957 under which agreements the defendants were permitted to store their goods as also to do business from a p...
Collector of C. Excise Vs. Autofield Engineering Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-01-1994
Reported in: (1994)(74)ELT656Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is a Reference Application moved by the Collector in respect of this Bench Order No. 1856/93-WRB, dt. 21-9-1993.2. The issue involved in that appeal was whether higher notional credit, which was not initially taken at the time of entry of inputs but subsequently claimed, could be allowed or not.3. The respondents received certain inputs during the period April 1988 - August 1988 from small scale units paying duty at the concessional rate under Notification No. 175/86. In such cases, they are entitled to claim higher notional credit in terms of Rule 57B of the Central Excise Rules. However, at the time of initial taking of the credit, by mistake, they took only the actual duty paid as credit instead of higher notional credit eligible to them. On noticing this mistake, they wrote a letter on 14-9-1988 requesting for allowing the duty credit eligible to them on account of higher notional credit. This request was disallowed by the authorities below and hence the appeal came up to ...
Smt. I. Vs. Shri B.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-01-1994
Reported in: 1994(3)BomCR521
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. This is an unfortunate litigation involving marital status of two educated women i.e. Smt. Indu Bharat Arora (known as Indu Kapoor prior to her marriage) and Smt. Reeta B. Arora (known as Reeta Dhawan prior to her marriage) both of whom were married to one Bharat Yashodanandan Arora at one time or another. An ex-parte decree of divorce was passed by the Court purporting to dissolve the marriage of Bharat Yashodanandan Arora. Soon thereafter Bharat married one Reeta. The ex-parte decree for divorce was set aside. The marriage of Bharat with Reeta is alleged to be in contravention of section 15 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.2. After setting aside of ex-parte decree of divorce, Bharat and Indu have reconciled and are residing together as husband and wife and are not interested in divorce. Reeta is interested in upholding of ex-parte decree of divorce purporting to dissolve marriage of Bharat with Indu though Bharat is no more interested in pursuing of litigation pertainin...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›