Mumbai Court September 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.
Supchand S/O Nathuji Lonare Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-19-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ3939
1. The original accused No. 1 Supchand, appellant herein, has preferred the present appeal before this Court aggrieved by the judgment dated 30-9-1991 passed by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Bhandara in Sessions Trial No. 16 of 1990 State of Maharashtra v. Supchand and another whereby the said court has convicted the accused-appellant for the offence under Section 306 of the Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine further R.I. for one year, and also convicted the accused-appellant for the offence under Section 498A of the Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine further R.I. for three months. Both these substantive sentences were ordered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhandara, to run concurrently. 2. In brief, the prosecution case is that the accused-appellant married Geeta on 5-12-1976 Geeta stayed with the acc...
Vishwanath S/O. Badru Sawale Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-19-1994
Reported in: 1996(2)BomCR179
R.M. Lodha, J.1. The accused appellant Vishwanath Badru Sawale, who was tried for offences punishable under sections 376 and 376 read with section 511 of the Indian Penal Code in Sessions Case No. 61 of 1991 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Washim, but convicted by the said Court for the offence under section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, vide judgment dated 22-1-1992, has preferred this appeal.2. The accused appellant was charged for the offences under sections 376 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code for having committed rape and/or attempted to commit rape on Amrapali daughter of Baban, a child of 4 years. Prosecution case, in short, is that on 5-1-1991 at about 12.00 noon Amrapali daughter of Baban, and grand-daughter of Haribhau Dagdu Tayade (P.W. 1), who was hardly 4 years old, was playing in the house and the accused-appellant took Amrapali to his house by alluring her that he would give her one banana. The girl child Amrapali without thinking further went along with the accused-ap...
Plastichemix Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-1994
Reported in: (1995)(75)ELT664Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal is directed against the order-in-appeal No. M-252/8D.54/87, dated 22-4-1987 confirming the order-in-original Ad/24/86, dated 9/13-1-1987 confirming the demand of duty of Rs. 11,692.53 on the ground that the appellants had clandestinely removed the manufactured goods without payment of appropriate duty.2. The factory premises of the appellant were visited by the officers on 5-2-1986 where they found an excess to the extent of 236 kgs and shortage to the extent of 276 kgs. On seeking explanation from the appellants they submitted that there was an irregular accounting resulting in the erroneous posting of the various products. The same was however not accepted. Hence the SCN dt. 16-7-1986 was issued by the Supdt. made answerable to the Asst. Collr. for recovery of the duty.The said notice contained the allegation of wilful suppression. The matter was adjudicated upon by the Asst. Collector where the contention was raised that with suppression etc. alleged against the appe...
Mahabirprasad S. Deora and Etc. Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Bom142; 1995(3)BomCR640; 1996(1)MhLj1013
ORDERPendse, J. 1. Both these petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, can be conveniently disposed of by common judgment as the challenge in both the petitions is to the validity of the Notification dated May 29, 1991 issued by the Director General in exercise of powers conferred under sub-section (3) of Section 21 of the Indian Post Office Act, 1898.By Notification, the Director General made the order to be called as 'Delivery of Mail Order 1991' and the order is to apply to delivery of unregistered mail of the classes specified in the order. The unregistered mail of the following classes i.e.(a) Letter mail namely envelopes, Inland Letter Cards, Postcards and Aerogrammes; (b) Book packets and sample packets; (c) Acknowledgment Cards and (d) Registered Newspapers are to be delivered by the Postman at the address of the addressee, only in single storeyed buildings and on the ground floor of storeyed buildings. The addressees other than those residing in the single store...
Kinetic Engineering Limited Vs. Unit Trust of India, and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Bom194; 1995(3)BomCR656; [1995]84CompCas910(Bom)
1. The Appellants who are a public limited company and listed on the Stock Exchange, Bombay, have referred this Appeal against the order passed by the Company Law Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the CL.B') in Company Petition Nos. 10 and 11/SC/CLB/VR/92, 1 to 92 of 1993, 94 to 103, 106 to 129, 132, 143 to 154, 156 to 161,167 to 173, 177 to 187, 190, 191, 195 and 196 of 1993 and 1 of 1994.2. Briefly stated facts giving rise to the present Appeal are as under:3. Unit Trust of India (hereinafter referred to as 'the UTI') the Respondents, as Part of its market operations, bought from the market 99, 075 shares of the Appellant-Company over a period of time and lodged the instruments of transfer with the Appellants for registration the details of which are set out in Annexure 'A' to the order passed by the CLB. The said transfer applications were considered by the Board of Directors of the Appellants in its various meetings and the Board decided to refuse registration of transfers on the ...
Virendra Metal Industries Vs. Shri K.M. Desai, Member, Industrial Cour ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-1994
Reported in: 1995(2)BomCR394; (1997)IIILLJ738Bom
1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India directed against an order of the Industrial Court, dated April 6, 1987, made in Complaint (ULP) No. 808 of 1985, under the provision of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as'the Act'). 2. The Petitioner was carrying on the activity of manufacturing Aluminium and Brass Watch Straps in its factory. The activity of manufacturing Watch Straps was closed down with effect from July 17, 1982 and by a notice displaced on July 16, 1985, the Petitioner declared that its factory had been closed down with effect from July 17, 1985, and the workers were advised to collect the closure compensation and other dues from a particular place any time after July 17, 1983. The copies of the notice were also sent to several statutory authorities like Inspector of Factories, Commissioner of Labour, Regional Director ESIC, Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Inspector o...
Arvind Shirsekar Vs. V.G. Khanvilkar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-1994
Reported in: 1995(2)BomCR398
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. Heard learned Counsel on all sides.2. By consent petitioner No. 2 is transposed as respondent No. 7 in the petition. Amendment to be carried out forthwith.3. The respondent No. 1 Dr. V.G. Khanvilkar was Dean of Agricultural faculty of Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth upto 31st July, 1992, when he retired. The Disciplinary Enquiry was held against Dr. Khanvilkar on various charges set out in para 3 of the petition. On 6th January, 1992, Shri V.T. Chari, the Enquiry Officer, made his report in the matter. By an order dated 11th March, 1992, the then Vice Chancellor of Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth Agricultural University passed an order to the effect that Dr. Khanvilkar shall not be entitled to any increment till the date of his retirement etc. as more particularly set out in the said order.4. Dr. Khanvilkar, the respondent No. 1 in this petition, filed Writ Petition No. 2735 of 1992 in this Court impugning the order passed by Vice Chancellor of the University on 11th March, 1992 o...
Collr. of C. Ex. Vs. New Great Eastern Spg. and Mfg. Co.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-15-1994
Reported in: (1995)(75)ELT613Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Invoking the provisions of Section 35G(1) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, the Collector of Central Excise, has sought reference to the High Court, on the questions framed by him, claiming them to be the issues of law arising out of Order No. 2676-77/93-WRB, dt.27-12-1993 of this Bench in Appeals ED (Bom) 149/86 and ED (Bom)150/86 filed by him against Order No. PPM-2351-2352/BI-793/794/85, dated 5-3-1986 of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay.2. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), had, vide the aforesaid order, allowed two appeals filed by the Respondent herein against the demand of duty as confirmed by the adjudicating authority, on the ground that the demands were hit by the limitation prescribed for raising such demand, as the show cause notice, contemplated under Section 11A of the CESA, 1944 was not issued within the period of six months, and that there was no scope for invoking extended period.Before the Tribunal, in the appeals preferred by the...
Amir Jamal Khan Pathan and Another Etc. Vs. State of Maharashtra and A ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-15-1994
Reported in: 1995(3)BomCR335; 1995CriLJ1957
V.H. Bhairavia, J.1. These three appeals out of the judgment and order dated 30th April 1991 passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Thane, in Sessions Case No. 122 of 1989, whereby the appellants-accused have been convicted for an offence punishable under Section 302, read with Section 149, I.P.C., and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to suffer further R.I. for 3 months. 2. Two separate appeals have been filed against the order of conviction and sentence viz., Criminal Appeal No. 366 of 1991 filed by original accused Nos. 1 and 5 and Criminal Appeal No. 390 filed by original accused Nos. 2 to 4. The State has also preferred an appeal for enhancement of the sentence, being Criminal Appeal No. 365 of 1991, Thus, all these three appeals have been heard together. 3. The respective appeals filed by the convicted accused challenge the order of their conviction and sentence for the offence punishable under Section 302, read with S...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Shri Suresh Ganpatrao Kenjale
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-15-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2487; 1995(2)MhLj65
1. The State of Maharashtra has preferred this criminal revision application under S. 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr. P.C.') and has called in question legality and propriety of the order dated 21-1-1994 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bhandara, whereby on the application filed by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Anti-Corruption Bureau, Bhandara, seeking police custody remand of the non-applicant, the Sessions Judge, Bhandara, rejected the said application and instead ordered for remand to magisterial custody vide order dated 21-1-1994. 2. The contention of the learned A.P.P. in support of the revision application is that the punishment prescribed for the offence under S. 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the P.C. Act') is five years and the punishment prescribed for the offence under S. 13(1)(d) r/w S. 13(2) of the P.C. Act is seven years and, therefore the offences under Ss. 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w S. 13(2) of the P.C. Act with which the accus...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »