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.
Babanrao Budhajirao Nanekar Vs. Adinath Sahakari Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-15-1994
Reported in: 1995(2)BomCR260
B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. By this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order of the Labour Court, Pune, dated 31st July, 1985, made in Application (BIR/LCB) No. 364 of 1983 and two orders dated 5th January, 1987, made by the Industrial Court, Pune, in Appeal (IC) No. 18 of 1985, both under the provisions of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 (hereinafter referred to as the 'the Act').2. The petitioner was employed in the first respondent Bank from 28th November, 1973 as a Peon. On 1st May, 1980, he was promoted as a Clerk. From 18th August, 1981, the petitioner was required to work as a Cashier-cum-Clerk. I am informed at the bar that the grade of clerk and Cashier-cum-clerk is identical, except that the clerk who is to work as Cashier-cum-clerk is paid a Cash Handling Allowance. On 22nd June, 1982, during a transaction, the petitioner made an over-payment of Rs. 10,000/- to a party by name Deccan Trading Co. which had encashed ...
Bakul N. Shah Vs. the State of Maharashtra, N.C.P. and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-15-1994
Reported in: 1995(2)BomCR557
M.S. Rane, J.1. The petitioner is one of the accused in the offence registered under the provisions of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act in NDPS Case No. 33 of 1993 pending on the file of the Special Judge, Grater Bombay. My brother Judge Shah by his order dated 22-2-1994 in Criminal Application No. 446 made by the present petitioner seeking his release on bail has directed the Special Judge to hear and dispose of the said case expeditiously within a period of six months from the date of his order and after passing of such order the request for bail was not granted.2. It appears that the learned Special Judge could not dispose of the case within time stipulated in the order dated 22-2-1994 and as a result thereof the petitioner filed another application in this Court being Criminal Application No. 1371 of 1994 which came to be decided by my brother Judge Shah by his another order. It appears from the said order of Shah, J., that the petitioner raised various points in the sa...
Sanjivani (Takali) S.S.K. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1994
Reported in: (1995)(79)ELT169Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal by the Collector of Central Excise, Aurangabad is against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) (No.PPM-P-567/AUR/88/88, dated 31-10-1988) by which he has confirmed the order of the Asstt. Collector of Central Excise, holding that the declaration filed before the Suptd. of Central Excise did not met the requirement of [Rule] 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.2. I have heard both the sides. It is not denied that the declaration was filed before the jurisdictional Suptd. at Kopargaon, the Asstt.Collector being the superior officer. The C.B.E.C. has in its instructions issued under circular F. No. 267/1 /87 CX VIII, dated 5-2-1987 says that the credit can be taken from the date when the declaration was filed with the Range Suptd., whose duty is to forward it to the Asstt. Collector. In the light of this, the appellant was entitled to take credit. I therefore allow the appeal....
Shroff and Company and ors. Vs. Food Corporation of India and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1994
Reported in: 1995(1)BomCR508
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. By these writ petitions, the petitioners have impugned award of contract dated 19th August, 1994 by respondents No. 1 to respondent No. 2 appointing respondent No. 2 as SCHT contractor at Jawaharlal Nehru Port for handing sugar vessels for a period of one year from 20th August, 1995 as more particularly set out therein. The petitioners have impugned the award of the said contract by food corporation of India to M/s. Jesia Mistry Private Limited mainly on the ground that M/s. Jesia Mistry Private Limited did not satisfy the conditions of eligibility prescribed by the relevant 'invitation to tender' referred to hereinafter. The petitioners have invoked Article 14 of Constitution of India and have made an allegation to the effect that the respondent No. 2 in these petitions has been favoured by respondent No. 1 by relaxation of conditions of eligibility as set out in the advertisement issued by respondent no. 1 and the accompanying invitation to tender. 2. For the reaso...
Shri Chandrakant Parsekar Vs. Smt. Rosy Simoes and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1994
Reported in: II(1994)ACC691; 1995ACJ767; 1995(4)BomCR285
M.S. Vaidya, J. 1. This is an appeal by original respondent No. 2 in Claim Petition No. 35 of 86 decided by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Panjim, Goa against an award dated 27th December, 1990 under which, the present appellant along with present respondent No. 2 were directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 60,000/- in the context of death of Maria Simoes, the daughter of the present respondent No. 1 i.e., the original claimant.2. The facts present a very sad story about the death of the daughter of respondent No. 1. It was not in dispute that the said daughter, who was about 20-years of age at the relevant point of time, was proposed to be married to Pascoal Fernandes, the present respondent No. 2. On 20/12/1985 both of them were riding a motor-cycle bearing registration No. GDG 9088 which belonged to the present appellant and which was borrowed by the present respondent No. 2 and Peter Simoes, a son of the present respondent No. 1. When the motor-cycle was being driven on a pub...
D.M. Woollen Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-13-1994
Reported in: (1995)LC754Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal is directed against order-in-orignal No.S/10-46/91-Gr-3, dated 15-5-1991 of the Additional Collector of Customs, Bombay imposing personal penalty of Rs. 11,000/- on the appellant vide Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962.2. The appellants imported consignment of 56 bales containing 15,746 kgs declared to be woollen rags completely pre-mutilated and claimed clearance under OGL vide Appx. 6, List 8, Part I, Entry No. 590 of the Policy Book AM 1990-93. The goods, on examination, were found to be ranging from 1 foot to 18 feet in length and 2 to 4 inches in width and were therefore not considered as completely pre-mutilated as required vide Public Notice 60/88. The goods were therefore felt to be liable to confiscation vide Sections 111(d) and (m) of the Customs Act and appellants as liable to penalty vide Section 112(a) of the said Act.The appellants waived the Show Cause Notice, and at the personal hearing expressed willingness to further mutilate them. The adjudicating a...
Dhimant Thakkar Vs. Fifth Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-13-1994
Reported in: (1994)51ITD578(Mum.)
1. The first ground of appeal relates to disallowance of a sum of Rs. 43,600 incurred by the assessee on a foreign tour in connection with pre-operation investigation of the eyes.2. The assessee is a solicitor by profession. During the year under consideration he incurred expenditure of Rs. 43,600 on foreign tour in connection with pre-operation investigation of his eyes. The claim was disallowed by the Assessing Officer on the ground that it was personal expenditure and the same did neither arise out of the profession nor it was incidental to the profession. The action of the ITO was upheld by the CIT(A).3. The learned counsel for the assessee has vehemently argued that the expenditure had a nexus with the activity of his profession, as eyes are necessary for carrying on the profession of the assessee and therefore, such expenditure cannot be called personal expenditure. The case laws referred to by the CIT(A) were distinguishable according to the learned counsel for the assessee. He...
Shashikant Sadashiv Bagwe and Etc. Vs. State of Maharashtra, and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-13-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Bom172; 1995(3)BomCR646; 1995(2)MhLj692
ORDERPendse, J.1. All these four petitionsfiled under Art. 226 of the constitution of India can be conveniently disposed of by common judgment as the issues raised in these petitions are identical and interrelated. The facts to be set out hereinafter would bring into focus the contentions urged in support of the reliefs sought in the petitions.2. Shashikant Sadashiv Bagwe, petitioner in Writ Petition No. 1919 of 1987 along with his brothers is owner of property bearing Survey No. 173/C, City Survey Nos. 3627 to 3631 known as 'Bagwe Mansion' which is situated on Mahatama Gandhi Road, Ghatkopar (West), Bombay. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay decided to widen the road to meet the growing traffic in this busy locality. On March 8, 1966, the Government of Maharashtra sanctioned Development Plan for 'N' Ward in which the property in dispute is situated. The plan came into force with effect from April 9, 1966 and it is not in dispute that the property is designated or reserved in ...
Kishor S/O Raghunath Shrirama Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-13-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ1765
1. The accused appellant who was tried for the offence under Section 376 Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), by Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur is Sessions Case No. 80/88, has filed the present appeal before this Court aggrieved by the judgment dated 28-8-1991 passed by the said Court whereby he has been convicted of the offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section 511 IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine further rigorous imprisonment for three months. 2. The prosecution case in brief according to the statement of prosecutrix Smt. Satvaleela (P.W. 1) is that, on 20-10-1987, the husband of the prosecutrix had gone to his field early in the morning for ploughing. Prosecutrix is resident of Vaigaon, Tahsil Bramhapuri, district Chandrapur and the accused appellant is also resident of the said village. When prosecutrix was alone and she was carrying tiffin for her husband to the field ...
Zilla Parishad, Dhule and ors. Vs. Rajendra Hiraman Khairnar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-13-1994
Reported in: [1995(70)FLR64]; (1995)IILLJ565Bom
B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. These three writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India impugn order of the Industrial Court, Nasik, dated 14th October, 1988, made in Revision Application (ULP) No. 137 of 1988, Revision Application (ULP) No. 129 of 1988 and order dated 9th September, 1988 in Revision Application (ULP) No. 135 of 1988. Since the facts are almost identical and issues requiring consideration are also identical, it would be convenient to dispose of these three writ petitions by a common judgment. 2. For the purpose of appreciating the fact, I shall refer to the facts in Writ petition No. 1368 of 1989. The First petitioner is a Zilla Parishad constituted under the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad Act. The Second petitioner is the Chief Executive Officer thereof. The Respondent was given a letter of appointment dated 24th March, 1986. It stated as follows : 'Shri Rajendra Hiraman Khairnar, residing at Pramodnagar, Plot No. 50, Deopur, Dhule, is appointed as a clea...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »