Mumbai Court April 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.
L.R. Castelino Vs. Official Liquidator, High Court, Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1994
Reported in: [1995]84CompCas749(Bom)
A.P. Shah, J. 1. On a representation made by the applicant seeking promotion from the post of company-paid peon to the post of company-paid clerk, B. N. Srikrishna J. passed the following order on June 9, 1992 : 'In view of the repeated complaints made by the company-paid staff with regard to their recruitment and promotion, it is necessary to frame rules governing these issues. The official liquidator is directed to frame draft rules with regard to recruitment and promotion and get them approved by the company judge. Pending such approval, there shall be no further recruitment or promotion of the company-paid staff unless specific approval is obtained from the company judge.' 2. The official liquidator failed to comply with the aforesaid directions in spite of several reminders and therefore the petitioner filed the present application for taking action against the official liquidator under the Contempt of Courts Act. The official liquidator has filed an affidavit offering his explana...
Deepak Son of Narayanappa Tewere and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1994
Reported in: 1995(4)BomCR386; 1995CriLJ2219
R.M. Lodha, J. 1. Yet another young woman, aged about 23 years has died within 2 1/2 months of her marriage at the husband's house. Her death is accidental or suicidal or homicidal, is the question and if homicidal who is responsible. 2. Deepak Narayanappa Tewere (accused No. 1-husband), Suresh Narayanappa Tewere (accused No. 2-husband's brother), Dattatraya Narayanappa Tewere (accused No. 3-husband's brother), Smt. Vatsalabai w/o Narayanappa Tewere (accused No. 4-husband's mother), Smt. Sulochana Keshaoappaa Bare (accused No. 5-husband's sister), Smt Triveni Suresh Tewere (accused No. 6-wife of husband's brother Suresh, accused No. 2) and Smt. Prabha Vijayappa Ruikar (accused No. 7-husband's sister) were charged of the offences under Section 302. I.P.C. or under Section 302 read with Section 34, I.P.C, Section 201, I.P.C. or under Section 201 read with Section 34, I.P.C. and under Section 498A, I.P.C. or under Section 498A read with Section 34, I.P.C., by the Additional Sessions Judge...
Yousuf FazlehusaIn Zaveri and Another Vs. Ajay Singh and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1994
Reported in: [1995]213ITR712(Bom)
M.L. Pendse, J.1. Yousuf Fazlehusain Zaveri commenced the business of manufacture and sale of jewellery in the name and style of Yousuf Fazlehusain Zaveri in the year 1957. On July 28, 1976, Yousuf admitted his major son to the business as a partner and petitioner No. 1 partnership firm was registered under the Indian Partnership Act. The firm is also registered with the income-tax authorities under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The previous year of the firm for the purpose of income-tax is the Samvat year and the first assessment year was 1977-78. The firm filed its return of income for the assessment year 1978-79 on June 27, 1978, along with the relevant supporting documents including the profit and loss account and the balance-sheet. The firm clearly mentioned that the closing stock was value at cost or market price, whichever is less. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the Income-tax Officer examined the books of account and scrutinised the gold account. The gold account ...
Vijay Jagannath Indolikar Vs. Maharashtra Water Supply and Sewerage Bo ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1994
Reported in: 1995(1)BomCR160
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. A most curious and unusual situation has arisen in this case where the appellant who appears in person is virtually asking for a relief that has not been specifically prayed for. Further more, the other complicated aspect of the matter is that effectively the appellant seeks a declaration that his termination from service by the respondent-board is non-est, without having specifically agitated and contested this issue. Whether it is permissible for the Court to grant such reliefs is a moot point that has been vigorously agitated by the two learned Counsel in this proceeding. I must prefix this judgment by expressing my profound appreciation to Mr. Kumbhkoni, learned Counsel, who was requested by me to study the record, take instructions from the appellant who incidentally has appeared in person from the trial Court upto this Court because it did appear that the case required some research and skilled presentation. Mr. Kumbhkoni, not only readily agreed at short noti...
Bennett Coleman Co. Ltd. and Others Vs. Mumbai Mazdoor Sabha
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-25-1994
Reported in: 1994(4)BomCR505; (1995)ILLJ225Bom
D.R. Dhanuka. J.1. By Writ Petition No. 1079 of 1994, the petitioners seek to impugned order dated 17th February 1994 passed by the Industrial Court in application for interim relief made by the complainant in Complaint (ULP) No. 1260 of 1993. 2. By Writ Petition No. 1090 of 1994, the petitioner seek to impugned order dated 21st February 1994 passed by the Industrial Court in application for interim relief made by the complainant in Complaint (ULP) No. 1261 of 1993. 3. Both the above referred petitions are inter-connected and are heard together. At the hearing of the petitions for consideration of admission thereof, I had made it clear to the learned counsel on both sides that the Court shall endeavour to dispose of both the petitions finally as far as possible. The learned counsel on both sides were thus invited by the Court to argue the petitions in detail. 4. The petitioner no. 1 Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. is a proprietor of well known 'Times of India Group Publications'. The petiti...
Shriniwas Raghvendra Javalgekar Vs. the Bank of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-25-1994
Reported in: 1994(4)BomCR139
A.A. Halbe, J.1. These appeals are taken up together as they raise common question relating to the propriety of the observations of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Union Bank v. Dalpat Gaurishankar Upadyay : 1992(1)BomCR354 . Whereas the main grievance of the appellant original loanee of the Bank is that the respondent/Bank is not entitled to interest on interest in terms of the ratio laid down in the above case, the grievance of the Bank is that this view needs reconsideration as that would deprive the Bank of the sizable income by way of interest on the interest, which stands merged in the main principal and that this would seriously erode the financial strength of the Banking operations in this country. Large chunk of the amounts of interest merged in the original advances given by the Bank would stand frozen with reference to the interest income available from those amounts, which at least constitute 1/3rd to 1/2 of the total claims. It is also urged that the banks are ...
Devisingh S/O Balaramsingh Raghuwanshi and ors. Vs. Smt. Shailabai Wd/ ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-24-1994
Reported in: 1996(2)BomCR183
H.W. Dhabe, J.1. Both these appeals preferred by the contesting parties, feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Washim, in Special Civil Suit No. 8 of 1980 which is partly against them, can be disposed of by this common judgment. Since both the contesting parties have preferred the instant appeals, they are conveniently referred to in this judgment as either the plaintiff or the defendants as the case may be.2. The facts are that the plaintiff and the defendants 1 to 5 formed a joint Hindu family. Their genealogical tree is as follows :Lalsingh|Balramsingh Deft. No. 1 (since died) Hirabai (wife) Deft. No. 2| |Devising Deft. No. 3 Vijaysingh Deft. No. 5 Rajendrasingh Died on 13-10-1979| |Surjitsingh (Deft. No. 4) Shailabai (wife) (plff.)|Jagjitsingh died on 11-8-1979The above genealogical tree shows that common ancestor Lalsingh had one son Balramsingh who was the original defendant No. 1 and had died during the pendency of the suit. Si...
Faredoon Maneckji Dalal Vs. Phiroze Bomanji Javeri
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-24-1994
Reported in: 1995(4)BomCR512
A.P. Shah, J.1. This matter has been placed before me on a reference made by the Taxing Master. Briefly, the facts leading to the reference are as follows :The plaintiff had filed a suit against the defendant claiming following reliefs : (a) That it may be declared that the defendant has no right title or interest in the said premises situate at Silla Villa, 21 Meghraj Sethi Marg, Bombay Central, Bombay-8 and that he is trespasser in respect of the said premises; (b) That the defendant be ordered and decreed to vacate and deliver to the plaintiff quiet vacant and peaceful possession of the said premises situate at Silla Villa, 21, Meghraj Sethi Marg, Bombay Central, Bombay-400 008; (c) that the defendant be ordered and decreed to pay to the plaintiff: (i) a sum of Rs. 500/- per month as mesne profits and/or damages for the defendant's wrongful use and occupation of the said premises till the date of the suit aggregating to Rs. 4,500/- together with interest thereon at the rate of 6% pe...
Minerva Dealers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs (Appeals)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-22-1994
Reported in: (1994)(48)ECC87
1. This appeal is directed against the order-in-Appeal No. 382/86 BCH dated 18.8.1986 of the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay, confirming the Order-in-Original No. S/10-100/83 13 dated 20.10.1983 of the Dv. Collector of Customs, Bombay ordering, vide Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962, confiscation of a consignment of Italian marble, but granting option to the appellants to pay fine of Rs.78,000/- in lieu of confiscation.2. The appellant imported the items referred to above, of c.i.f. value of Rs.78,296, and sought clearance thereof under OGL as per Appendix 10(1) of the Policy Book AM 83-84. At the time of seeking clearance, they also produced a copy of Provisional SSI Registration Certificate, dated 1.8.1984 showing their proposed manufacturing activity as processing and finishing of marble. The letter of credit for the said import was opened on 28.2.1984. However as neither on 28.2.1984 nor on 29.6.1984, when the shipment was effected, [did] the appellants possess any re...
M/S. Ellictt Swaud and Hill Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Trustees of the Port of ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-22-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Bom16; 1995(1)BomCR409; 1995(1)MhLj754
1. Heard learned counsel on all sides.2. For the reasons briefly indicated hereinafter, the writ petition is summarily dismissed. 3. Sometime in the year 1986, Messrs. Shah Tools & Bearing Company of Bombay imported certain consignment of Pipe Wrenches. The said goods were not cleared by the said importer. The petitioners claim to be the indenting agents of Record Tools Ltd. of Sheffield, England, who had shipped the goods in question consisting of 9 (nine) consignments of pipe wrenches. By an Order dated 4th July, 1989, the Additional Collector of Customs confiscated the said goods by virtue of the powers conferred on him under the Customs Act 1962. By this time the said goods were lying in the docks for more than three years. It is averred in para 5 of the petition that the said order of confiscation was passed by the Additional Collector of Customs as the petitioners could not produce a specific licence for its clearance. By the said order of confiscation an option was given to the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »