Mumbai Court August 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.
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Bhuma Bi and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-1994
Reported in: II(1994)ACC715; 1994ACJ627
A.A. Halbe, J.1. The insurer, original respondent No.. 3, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., has preferred this appeal, making a grievance that although its statutory liability was Rs. 50,000/- per accident, the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, in Claim Petition No. 62 of 1988, was pleased to direct that the entire award of Rs. 1,32,000/- with 12 per cent interest thereon should be borne by the insurer. It is further contended that the learned Member of the Tribunal fell in error when the learned Member observed that since the policy is the comprehensive policy, the liability of the insurance company cannot be restricted to Rs. 50,000/-.2. At the outset, it will have to be stated that the question of negligence on the part of the original respondent No. 1 is not disputed by the insurer. The facts are that on 31.3.1988 at about 11 p.m. respondent No. 1 drove mini bus No. GDF 1104 in a rash and negligent manner and when he was proceeding from Panaji towards old Goa, the vehicle dashed against ...
Ness N. Wadia Vs. Income Tax Officer.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-02-1994
Reported in: (1995)51TTJ(Mumbai)11
ORDERT.A. BUKTE, J.M. :This is the appellants appeal against the order of the CIT(A) - XXVI, Bombay dt. 18th Feb., 1994. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition of Rs. 22,39,000 regarding the consideration received on sale of Remainder mans reversionary interest held by the appellant in a private trust as causal income under S. 10(3) of the IT Act, 1961. The appellants contention was that the said consideration should have been treated as capital gains under Ss. 45 to 55 of the Act. As the entire consideration of Rs. 22,39,000 was invested in the capital gains bonds and, therefore, the capital gain was exempt under S. 54E of the Act. The Assessing Officer held that the beneficial interest was not a capital asset and hence the capital gains did not arise out of the transfer of the Remainder mans reversionary interest. The CIT(A) further held that the appellant did not hold any existing right of interest, being only a remainderman and such right would devolve only on a future date. It was subm...
The Collector of Bombay and Others Vs. Meena Narayan Idnani
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-01-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Bom363; 1995(3)BomCR42; (1995)97BOMLR766; 1995(1)MhLj238
ORDERPendse, J. 1. The Collector of Bombay and the Commissioner of State Excise have preferred this appeal to challenge legality of judgment dated February 23, 1993 delivered by learned single Judge in Writ Petition No. 391 of 1993 and which judgment is reported in : AIR1994Bom47 . The facts which gave rise to passing of this judgment are required to be set out to appreciate the complaint of the appellants.The respondent along with her husband was carrying on business in the name and style of M/s. J. Vikram Sales (India) at Shop No. 4, Laxmi Ratan Bldg., L. H. Road,Matunga Road (West), Mahim, Bombay-400016. The business of the firm was sale of Indian made foreign liquor. The Government of Maharashtra has framed rules known as the Bombay Foreign Liquor Rules 1953 and Rule 4, inter alia, provides that any person desiring to import and sell foreign liquor by wholesale shall apply to the Collector in Form F.L./A-IA. Rule 5 prescribes that the Collector may make inquiries for verification o...
Shri Maroti S/O Kashinath Kaharade Vs. the State of Maharashtra and an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-01-1994
Reported in: 1996(1)BomCR371
V.S. Sirpurkar, J.1. The applicant herein challenges the judgment passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Digras, by which he has acquitted original accused Nos. 1 and 2 for the offence under section 497 of the Indian Penal Code. The present revision is in the nature of a revision against the acquittal and the complainant (applicant herein) seeks retrial thereby of the accused.2. This case is a classic example of the callous, ignorance on the part of the investigating agency, Court, Police Prosecutor and the defence, of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code. The present complainant filed a report against accused No. 1, Anandrao Gulabrao Gawande, and alleged therein that he had committed adultery with his wife Usha, without his consent. This offence under section 497, Indian Penal Code, being a non-cognizable offence, the Police Station Officer of Digras Police Station sought a permission of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Digras, for investigating this offence. Th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›