Mumbai Court November 1995 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.
Col. Vijaysinh Gopalrao Ghorpade Vs. Namdeo Yeshwant Chavan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1995
Reported in: 1996(2)BomCR569; (1995)97BOMLR125
Ashok Agarwal, J.1. By the present Revision Application filed under section 31-F(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, petitioner, who is the original applicant, seeks to impugn a judgment and order passed by the competent authority Pune Division on 3rd of January, 1989 dismissing his claim for possession under section 13-A(1) of the Act. The Competent Authority, in paras 13 to 18 of his Judgment, has held that the petitioner has failed to prove that he is the owner is respect of the suit premises. Consequently he is not entitled to seek possession under section 13-A(1) of the Act. 2. It is undisputed that the property in question initially belonged to Shri B.T. Jagtap, the maternal uncle of the petitioner's father. Petitioner's father put up a construction, a part whereof is in occupation of the respondent as a tenant. As far as the petitioner is concerned, property is entered in his name in the City Survey Records merely on the basis of a statement of h...
Suresh S/O Sakhabapu Deshmukh Vs. Parbhani Municipal Council and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-29-1995
Reported in: 1996(3)BomCR150; (1996)98BOMLR422
N.P. Chapalgaonker, J.1. Heard Shri Dixit, Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Kishor Patil, A.G.P. for respondents 2 and 4.2. The petitioner is a member of Municipal Council, Parbhani. One Mr. Baburao Vishwanathrao Mathpati was elected as President of the Municipal Council, Parbhani on 17th December, 1991. Under section 55-A of the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965 he was removed from the President's post on 27th July, 1993. It appears that in the vacancy caused by this removal, petitioner was elected as President of the Municipal Council, Parbhani, but when Mr. Mathpati's removal under section 55-A was set aside by this Court, this Court restored Mr. Mathpati in office and directed that he be again reinstated in the office of the President. The office which was occupied by the petitioner was to be vacated. The subsequent development is that 'No confidence motion' is passed against Shri Mathpati on 6th November, 1995 and the Council is to elect the new President.3. By Article 243-T...
Kedia Organic Chemicals P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-1995
Reported in: (1996)(83)ELT438Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Though this day only stay application was listed for hearing, after hearing both the sides, since the arguments canvased are the same as for disposal of the appeal and since both sides were agreeable to dispose of the appeal, we have taken up the appeal itself for disposal after granting waiver of pre deposit of duty.2. This is an appeal against Order-in-Original No. 17/Demand/95, dated 25-8-1995 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Surat. Extended period has been invoked for confirming the demand by the Commissioner.3. The undisputed facts can be briefly stated as below. The appellants M/s. Kedia Organic Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. were earlier having the name of M/s. Sevenille Petro Chemical Industries Pvt. Ltd. and they wanted to change the name to M/s. Kedia Organic Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., for which procedural formalities were undertaken by getting the name of the certificates changed to Kedia Organic Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. They approched the Registrar of the Companies...
Hercules Holdings (P.) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-1995
Reported in: (1996)57ITD215(Mum.)
1. The appeal is filed by a limited company and it is aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) CIT(A) in upholding the rectification carried out by the Assessing Officer of his order passed under Section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (referred to as the Act'). The Assessing Officer initially accepted the returned nil income by an order made under Section 143(1) of the Act on 2-2-1989.Subsequently, he invoked the Section 154 of the Act for carrying out rectification to the assessment order and applied the provisions of Section 115J of the Act for which he observed that Section 205 of the Companies Act have been made applicable to the section and that the assessee having suffered losses in an earlier year, for arriving at the book profits figure, earlier years losses or depreciation whichever is less must be deducted and if there is no depreciation, its figure should be taken as nil, which being lesser of the two, the profits of the year is the book profit...
M/S Banka (India) Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Bom139; 1996(3)BomCR191; (1996)98BOMLR334
ORDER1. Arbitration Petition No. 161 of 1995 has been filed by M/s. Banka (India) Ltd. for enlargement time to enable the 2nd Respondent therein to make his award. Arbitration Petition bearing Lodging No. 246 of 1995 is filed by Union of India for removal of the 2nd Respondent as the Umpire under the provisions of Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, (for short, 'the Act'). Arbitration Petition filed by the Union of India is yet to be numbered. However, since the subject-matter of both these petitions are correlated, both the petitions have been finally heard together at the stage of admission itself and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The Petitioners in Arbitration Petition No. 161 of 1995 are 1st Respondents in Arb. Petn. Lodging No. 246 of 1995 and the Petitioners in Arb. Petn. Lodging No. 246 of 1995 are 1st Respondents in Arb. Petition 161 of 1995. The 2nd Respondent is common in both the petitions. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred in this judgm...
Bonbehari V. Nimbkar and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Bom261; 1996(2)BomCR555; (1996)98BOMLR288; 1996(2)MhLj361
ORDERN. D. Vyas, J.1. The present Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is in the nature of a public interest litigation whereby the Petitioners are challenging allotment of Government land in favour of the Respondent No. 4, who is the wife of the Respondent No. 5, who was at the relevant time a Member of Legislative Assembly. The controversy in this Petition thus centres around the allotment of land admeasuring 8,000 sq. ft. out of Survey No. 6470, situated at Phaltan, District Satara.2. It is the case of the Petitioners in the Petition that the Petitioners are well known citizens and are engaged in public life; that the Petitioner No. 1 is well known for his agricultural research; that the Petitioner No, 2 is a freedom fighter and has been honoured by the Central Government and the State Government; that the Petitioner No. 3 is a President of Mahila Samajik Parishad, Phaltan and has been taking active part in various social, educational, political activities fo...
Eknath S/O Sukhdeo Gaikwad Vs. Sow. Nirmala W/O Eknath Gaikwad
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-1995
Reported in: 1996(3)BomCR147; (1996)98BOMLR419
A.D. Mane, J.1. This revision can be disposed of at the admission stage itself. On hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, rule is, therefore, made returnable forthwith.2. A short but important question is involved in this civil revision application.The petitioner is the husband of the respondent wife, whose marriage took place in accordance with Bhil rites on 28-4-1986. The petitioner filed Hindu Marriage Petition No. A-46/1995 in the Family Court at Aurangabad for dissolution of the marriage. Pending that petition the respondent made her application under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, the Act) and the Family Court by its order made on 20-9-1995 directed the petitioner to pay interim alimony at the rate of Rs. 700/- per month to the respondent and her minor children, in addition to Rs. 500/- towards costs of the expenses of the litigation and Rs. 160/- towards the expenses to be borne by the respondent for attending the Court.3. Mr. Naik, learned Counsel ...
Collector of Customs Vs. Zipper (India) Products
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-27-1995
Reported in: (1996)(84)ELT193Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal from the. Revenue against the order-in-appeal No.S/49-1592/84CL, dated 30-9-1985, allowing the appeal of the respondents.2. The respondents who are engaged in the manufacture of zip fastners have imported a consignment of complete machinery consisting of a number of machines for manufacture of polyster zip fastners. As per the invoice, the following machines are declared to be the complete machinery for manufacture of Polyster zip fastners: 3. Shri Mondal, the ld. SDR points out that there is no dispute with regard to the stitching/sewing machine and drying machine, which the respondents did not contest its classification. The dispute relates only to other machines. The Asstt. Collector, held that these six machines should be classifiable under Heading 84.59(1) of the erstwhile Tariff item prevalent during 1984-85, whereas, the respondents claimed classification under 84.59(2) of the erstwhile Tariff. The Collector(Appeals) accepted the classification claimed by t...
Ashok Hari Gite C/O Association of Engineering Workers Vs. V. Galaxy K ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-27-1995
Reported in: [1996(73)FLR1267]
B.N. Srikrishna, J. 1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against an Award dated 13th December, 1989, made by the Labour Court, Nasik, in Reference (IDA) No. 60 of 1982 under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The Petitioner was employed in the service of the First Respondent in its industrial establishment from the year 1974. He was served with a charge-sheet alleging against him misconduct of participation in an illegal strike. An enquiry was held into the charges alleged against the petitioner which resulted in his being found guilty and dismissed from service from 3.5.1981. 3. The Petitioner raised an industrial dispute before the Government Labour Officer. The Assistant Labour Officer submitted a failure report and thereafter a reference of the dispute for adjudication was made to the Labour Court, Nasik, vide Reference (IDA) No. 60 of 1982. The Labour Court, in the firs...
Maharashtra State Co-operative Cotton Growers' Marketing Federation Lt ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-27-1995
Reported in: (1999)IIILLJ843Bom
B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. These two cross writ petitions impugn the same order dated 5.8.1994 made in Complaint (ULP) No. 685 of 1987 by the Industrial Court, Bombay, under the provisions of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). For the sake of convenience the parties would be referred to as arrayed in Writ Petition No. 4130 of 1994. 2. The petitioner is a Co-operative Society established by the Government of Maharashtra for the purpose of marketing the cotton grown by Cotton Growers in Maharashtra. The petitioner is appointed as the Chief Agent to implement the the cotton monopoly procurement scheme under Section 42 of the Maharashtra State Cotton (Procurement, Processing and Marketing) Act, 1971. Initially, a Society by name Maharashtra State Co-operative Marketing Federation Limited was charged with the implementation of the Cotton Monopoly Scheme. That Society was taken over by the present...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »