Mumbai Court June 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.
M. Thankamani of Calcutta and Others Vs. Official Liquidator and Anoth ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-09-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Bom156
ORDERVyas, J. 1. Appeal No. 64 of 1990 is filed impugning the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 15th February 1990 making the Judge's Summons absolute. As far as Company Application No. 1248 of 1983 is concerned, the same has been referred to the Division Bench in view of the decision impugned in Appeal No. 64 of 1990.2. A question which requires to be considered in both these matters being common, both the matters are being disposed of by a common judgment. The short question that requires consideration in the present appeal is as to how time for filing a suit or an application for recovery of a claim on behalf of a Company which is ordered to be wound up is to be calculated in view of the provisions of S. 458A of the Companies Act, 1956.3. As far as the facts of both the matters are concerned, there is hardly any dispute. It would suffice to mention brief facts of the appeal which are as follows:A promissory note was executed on 16th January, 1976. On 7th July, 1978 a petiti...
M. Thankamani and Others (Appeal No. 64 of 1991) Vs. Official Liquidat ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-09-1994
Reported in: 1995(1)BomCR529; [1996]85CompCas318(Bom); 1995(1)MhLj769
N.D. Vyas, J. 1. Appeal No. 64 of 1991 is filed impugning the judgment of the learned single judge dated February 15, 1990, making the judge's summons absolute. As far as Company Application No. 1248 of 1983 is concerned, the same has been referred to the Division Bench in view of the decision impugned in Appeal No. 64 of 1991. 2. The question which requires to be considered in both these matters being common, both the matters are being disposed of by a common judgment. The short question that requires consideration in the present appeal is as to how time for filing a suit or an application for recovery of a claim on behalf of a company which is ordered to be wound up in to be calculated in view of the provisions of section 458A of the Companies Act, 1956. 3. As far as the facts of both the matters are concerned, there is hardly any dispute. It would suffice to mention the brief facts of the appeal, which are as follows : A promissory note was executed on January 16, 1976. On July 7, 1...
Mahendrakumar Shantilal Shah and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-09-1994
Reported in: 1994(4)BomCR428; 1994CriLJ2667; 1994(2)MhLj1371
Bhattacharjee, C.J.1. No one is present on behalf of the appellant in any of these appeals. Can these appeals be dismissed for default with Section 386 of the Code of Criminal Procedure staring at the face 2. A civil appeal, if not dismissed summarily under the provisions of Rule 11 of Order 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure, is to be listed for hearing with notice to the respondent and if the appellant does not appear when the appeal is called on for hearing, the Court may make an order that the appeal be dismissed. The cleavage of opinion as to whether such dismissal can be for default of appearance only, or on the merits also, has now been sealed by the Explanation added to Rule 17(1) of Order 41 by the Amendment of 1976, providing categorically that 'nothing in this sub-rule shall be construed as empowering the Court to dismiss the appeal on the merits.' 3. The law in the Criminal Jurisdiction is however different, as would appear from the provisions of Section 423 of the preceding...
Devji Ravji Patel Vs. Balasubramaniam and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-09-1994
Reported in: (1994)121CTR(Bom)427; [1994]210ITR925(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the notice dated March 6, 1985, issued by the second Income-tax Officer, C-V Ward, Bombay, under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), as being illegal and without jurisdiction. 2. The facts of the case may be stated as follows : 3. The assessee is an individual. The relevant assessment years are 1977-78 and 1978-79. The main source of income of the assessee during these two years was profit from the proprietary business in the name of Patel Brothers, share in the profit of the firm, Prince Stationers, and income from the property at 4th Marine Street, Bombay. For the assessment year 1977-78, the petitioner returned a net income of Rs. 14,330. For the assessment year 1978-79, the income returned was Rs. 22,113. All the requisite details including the profit and loss account and the balance-sheet were filed by the assessee along with the returns. 4. For the assessment year...
Subhaschandra Narayan Bhobe Vs. Land Acquisition Officer, Panaji, Goa ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-09-1994
Reported in: 1995(1)BomCR283
E.S. Da Silva, J.1. The appellant challenges in this appeal the Award of the learned Addl. District Judge, Panaji, dated 28-4-1989, in a reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter called the Act) in Land Acquisition Case No. 32 of 1986 whereby the learned Addl. District Judge has partly affirmed and partly modified the Award of the Land Acquisition Officer dated 28-1-1986.2. The case of the appellant is that the Government of Goa has acquired some land for the purpose of construction of approach road to Nerul Bridge on Nerul side. For that purpose section 4 of the Act was published on 29-12-1983. The appellant is the owner of a plot admeasuring 649.50 sq. meters which is a developed plot wherein his bungalow has been constructed. Out of that, an area comprising of 130 sq. meters has been acquired by the Government for the purpose of approach road to Nerul Bridge. It is further the case of the appellant that what was acquired is the front portion of the house wh...
The State of Maharashtra Vs. Sayyad Noor Hasan Gulam
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-09-1994
Reported in: 1995(1)BomCR70; (1994)96BOMLR87
V.A. Mohta, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India filed by the State of Maharashtra at the instance of the Superintendent, Central Prison, Bombay making a grievance against the order dated 25th June, 1993 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge for Greater Bombay by which he has ordered the transfer of the respondent-undertrial-prisoner-Sayyed Noor Hasan Gulam Hussain @ Bawa an accused charged for the offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code from District Prison, Kalyan to the Bombay Central Prison.2. We see no justification whatsoever for the impugned order. The respondent was lodged in Kalyan District Prison as per the circular dated 5-5-1993 issued by the Inspector General Police, Pune by which he classified certain prisoners gangwise and ordered them to be lodged in different jails keeping the law and order problem and safety of the prisoners as well as the staff in view. This circular was issued on the basis of an or...
Ahshru S/O. Ramji Gaiwal and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra and anr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-09-1994
Reported in: 1994(4)BomCR483
A.D. Mane, J.1. This criminal application is for quashing the criminal proceedings instituted on a private complaint being Criminal Case No. RTC 75 of 1992 on the file of Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jamkhed, for offences under sections 392, 395 and 447 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.2. In order to appreciate the question whether the allegations made in the complaint do or do not constitute offences complained of, regard may be had to few facts which are either admitted or not seriously disputed between the parties. There is land Survey No. 131/1 admeasuring 3 acres situated at village Songaon Taluka district Ahmednagar. This land claims to be of the ownership of the complainant but the said fact has been seriously disputed by the petitioners. It is the case of the complainant that on 7-2-1992 in the night the petitioners-accused harvested the crops standing on the disputed land. At the time of harvesting they were armed with deadly weapons. It was therefor...
Ashok Bhagwan Benjari Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-09-1994
Reported in: 1994(4)BomCR180
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant against his conviction under section 302 I.P.C. and imprisonment for life imposed thereunder vide judgment and order dated 25-10-1991, passed by Shri N.G. Ghotekar, Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, in Sessions Case No. 218/1989.2. The prosecution case in brief, as transpires from the recitals made in the F.I.R. lodged by P.W.1 Moti Gupta and as unfolded in the evidence adduced during trial is as under:-The informant Moti Gupta is residing in hut No. 22 situate in Baiganwadi, Shivaji Nagar, Govandi, Police Station Deonar, Greater Bombay. In the aforesaid hut, along with him his son Ram Achal (deceased) his brother-in-law Subhash, P.W. 7 and a person of his native place namely P.W. 11 Ram Sahai also used to live. According to the prosecution, the appellant was known to the informant and others because, till 3 to 4 months prior to the incident, he had been working with Nyamatmulla who was residing in Hut No. 28 s...
Hindustan Cocoa Products Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-08-1994
Reported in: 1995(1)BomCR555; 1994LC662(Bombay); 1994(74)ELT525(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Division-II, Thane, dated 6th May, 1985 rejecting its claim for refund of excise duty amounting to Rs. 1,80,301.38 in respect of the period commencing from 4-5-1974 to 4-12-1983. 2. The petitioner manufactures deodorised cocoa butter which was classified by it for the purposes of central excise under Item 12 of the Tariff Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 ('the Act') which applied to 'vegetable non-essential oils'. During the period from 4-5-1974 to 4-5-1979 the petitioner claimed full exemption of excise duty in respect of deodorised cocoa butter manufactured by it under Notification No. 33/63, dated 1-3-1963 which was duly allowed by the concerned authorities. On 4-5-1979, the petitioner was informed by the Superintendent of Central Excise that it was not eligible for exemption under Notification No. 33/63 in respect of payment of excise duty on manufacture of de...
Shri John Fernandes, Since Deceased, Through Legal Representatives and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-08-1994
Reported in: 1995(1)BomCR15; (1994)96BOMLR58
E.S. Da Silva, J.1. This writ petition which challenges the judgment and order of the Administrative Tribunal dated 13th September, 1988, can be disposed of by a short judgement since the point involved is a clear point of law and has been already concluded by a recent judgement of a Division Bench of this Court.2. The original late petitioner No. 1 was the son of late Joao Anthonio Fernandes who died in 1958. He was the owner of a paddy field and after his death he left as his heirs the late petitioner No. 1 and his brother Carlito Fernandes. Upon the death of Joao, inventory proceedings were instituted in 1959 wherein the said Carlito was appointed as 'Cabeca de Casal' (Head of the estate). The paddy field was being cultivated by late Joao during his lifetime, but during the inventory proceedings, the same started being cultivated by Carlito as 'Cabeca de Casal'. The inventory proceedings were completed somewhere in December, 1980 and the paddy field was allotted to the late petition...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »