Mumbai Court February 1995 Judgments
Shree Krishnakeshav Lab Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-15-1995
Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT74Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This miscellaneous application seeks to modify the terms of the Interim Order No. 591 to 594/94-WRB, dated 26-12-1994 passed by this Bench ordering the applicants to deposit Rs. 15.00 lacs in cash towards duty. The question relates to the allegation that some of the intravenous fluid containers bear the monogram (+) on the bottom of the container and hence they are dutiable We considered the prima facie grounds for time bar of the demand and prima facie held that the demand appears to be time barred. However, in respect of demand which is within the period of normal period of limitation, we directed the applicants to deposit Rs. 15.00 lacs in cash. Shri K.S. Nanavati, the Ld. Advocate, pleads that they were to comply with the order and approached the Bank, who expressed their inability of extending any finance. He refers to the correspondences with the bank filed alongwith the miscellaneous application. Moreover, there is a subsequent development with regard to the issue on merits....
Tag this Judgment!Bennett Coleman and Company Ltd. Vs. Durga Prasad Dube and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-15-1995
Reported in: (1996)IIILLJ705Bom
K. G. Shah, J. 1. I have heard Mr. Dharmadhikari, learned Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Ganguli, learned Advocate for respondent no. 1 at length. I am convinced that this writ petition should succeed and the impugned order passed by the Presiding Officer, 9th Labour Court, Bombay respondent no. 2 herein dated 3rd September, 1994 in Reference (IDA) No. 53 of 1989 be set aside. 2. The facts of the case in brief may be stated as follows : The respondent joined the service of the petitioner on 31st May 1950 as Mono Operator. Some time after the respondent joined the service, the petitioner called upon him to furnish information for preparation of his history sheet. On the basis of the information supplied by the respondent, the petitioner prepared the history sheet of the respondent. In that history sheet the year of birth of the respondent was shown to be 1926. 3. On 5th January 1971 the respondent submitted a form for being a member of the provident fund benefits and in that form ...
Tag this Judgment!Sharad Dungardas Gandhi and ors. Vs. Maharashtra State Electricity Boa ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-15-1995
Reported in: (1998)IIILLJ678Bom
B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. This Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the Order of the Industrial Court, Thane, dated September 29, 1987 made in Revision Application (ULP)No. 24 of 1986 under the provisions of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. Petitioners 1 and 2 are ex-employees and Petitioners 3 and 4 are employees of the First Respondent-Electricity Board. The First Petitioner was employed as a Lower Divisional Clerk in April, 1981 and his services were terminated on August 31, 1983 by the First Respondent. The Second Petitioner was appointed on February 2, 1981 and her services were also terminated on August 31, 1983. The Third Petitioner was appointed on August 13, 1981 and he was removed from service on August 31, 1983. The Fourth Petitioner was, appointed in March, 1981 and his services were also terminated on August 31, 1983. The Petition...
Tag this Judgment!Ridhi Siddhi Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. Kim Corporation and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-15-1995
Reported in: (1995)97BOMLR284
V.P. Tipnis, J.1. The petitioner is a registered co-operative housing society. The respondent No. 1 is a builder-developer and he has constructed a building known as Alfrad Apartments, Lewis Wadl, Panch Pakhadi final Plot No. 81, TPS1, Eastern Express Highway, Thane. The members of the petitioner society have purchased the flats in the aforesaid building form respondent No. 1.2. The 1st respondent builder-developer made an application to the respondent No. 2 i.e. Executive Engineer, Thane Urban Division, Maharashtra State Electricity Board for electric supply on or about 14th July 1986. As no response was received a reminder dated 5-11-1986 was sent by the 1st respondent. The 2nd respondent asked the 1st respondent to bear the costs of sub-station, transformer centre, high tension and low tension lines cost and the cost of other accessories, required by his letter dated 26th November 1986. However the exact amount was not mentioned. The petitioners have asserted that they were ready an...
Tag this Judgment!Ammukutty Amma Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-15-1995
Reported in: I(1996)ACC584; 1996ACJ1239
N.D. Vyas, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the original plaintiff against the judgment and order dated 27.1.1983 passed by the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nasik, in a suit filed by the appellant. The trial court has passed a decree for Rs. 50,000/- against respondent No. 2-2nd defendant and did not pass any decree against respondent No. 1-1st defendant. The claim of the appellant in the suit was for the sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- as damages. Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree the present appeal is preferred by the original plaintiff.2. The appellant is the mother of one P. Krishnadas, the deceased, who was employed in the Artillery Centre at Nasik which is controlled by the Ministry of Defence of the respondent No. 1. The respondent No. 2 was the Training Instructor in 6/2 Training Regiment Topkhana Centre which formed part of the said Artillery Centre. The deceased as a candidate was recruited in the military service and like other candidates was posted at the said c...
Tag this Judgment!Gundu Baburao Shinde Vs. Managing Director, Shetkari Sahakari Sangh Lt ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-14-1995
Reported in: (1997)IIILLJ473Bom
1. This Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns an order of the Industrial Court dated November 23, 1987 made in Revision Application (ULP) Nos. 25 of 1986 and 52 of 1986 under the provisions of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Petitioner was working as a 'Mapadi' (an employee measuring and selling articles in a shop) in the service of the Respondent which sells consumable articles in its shops including kerosene which is a controlled commodity under the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act. 2. In March 1980 the Petitioner was working in the Vaibhaywadi shop of the Respondent. On March 31, 1980 there was a surprise visit to the said shop by D. D. Pawar, a Director of the Respondent, along with S. R. Chavan, Manager, Diesel Division, and a Inspector, M. A. Dalvi. During the course of the surprise visit, three irregularities were noticed by them. Th...
Tag this Judgment!S.A. Sarang Vs. W.G. Forge and Allied Industries Ltd., Thane and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-14-1995
Reported in: [1995(70)FLR967]; (1996)ILLJ67Bom
B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. The Petitioner in this Writ Petition challenges an Award dated 30th August, 1984 made by the First Labour Court, Thane in Reference (IDA) No. 211 of 1977 under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The Petitioner is an employee in the service of the erstwhile company, known as 'W. G. Forge & Allied Industries Ltd.' which has gone into liquidation as a result of the order made in Company Petition No. 7 of 1992. By an order dated 11th March, 1993, made by the learned Company Judge in Company Application No. 551 of 1992 in Company Petition No. 7 of 1992, leave was granted to the Official Liquidator to implead himself as party - respondent to this writ petition. Although the Deputy Official Liquidator personally appeared before this Court on 9th June, 1992, he has not chosen to appear thereafter, nor has appearances of any advocate been filed. Dr. Kulkarni, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner, states t...
Tag this Judgment!Madhav Sakharam Shilotri and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-14-1995
Reported in: 1997ACJ857
N.D. Vyas, J.1. These are two appeals preferred by the original claimants in respect of their respective claims before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jalgaon. The Tribunal rejected both the claims. Hence the present appeals.2. The facts relating to both the appeals are common inasmuch as that one Manoj and one Prasanna, two youths of 19 years of age, died as a result of accident which took place at 9.30 p.m. on 8.12.1984 in the city of Jalgaon. The accident took place on the road going towards M.J. College and Police Headquarters. Manoj was driving motor cycle and his friend Prasanna was on the pillion seat. The collision took place between the motor cycle and police jeep driven by the original opponent No. 3. Both these boys had brilliant academic career and after passing their XIIth Standard examination, they were students in the First Year of the Engineering and Technology College at Jalgaon. Both of them were from Bombay and they were staying in the hostel. On 8.12.1984, they...
Tag this Judgment!State of Maharashtra Vs. Bhausaheb Dadasaheb Misal (Deceased) Through ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-14-1995
Reported in: (1995)97BOMLR500
M.L. Pendse, J.1. The State Government has preferred this appeal to challenge legality of judgment dated October 30, 1986, recorded by the Additional District Judge, Raigad in Land Acquisition Reference No. 39 of 1986. The facts which gave rise to passing of this judgment are as follows :-The Respondents were the owners of land bearing Survey No. 16, Hissa No. 2, admeasuring 60,8 Ares, situated at village Bhisegaon In Karjat Taluka of Raigad District. On June 8, 1978, the State Government published Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act to the effect that the land in dispute along with certain other lands were likely to be needed for a public purpose of proposed III Railway Line between Karjat and Lonawala for South-East Ghat Line and for construction of Railway staff quarters. The Land Acquisition Officer commenced proceedings after publication of Notification under Section 6 of the Act. The Respondents lodged claim for compensation alleging that the land acquired th...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax, Maharashtra State, Bombay Vs. Mazgaon Docks ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-13-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)BomCR245
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J. 1. By this reference under section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, made at the instance of the Revenue, the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal has referred the following two questions of law to this Court for opinion : '(i) Whether, on a proper construction of the agreement as a whole as embodied in the schedule to acceptance of tender dated December 28, 1963 and its general condition and special condition, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the transaction of building and supplying 'one twin screw steel motor launch' effected by the respondent to the Director-General of Supplies and Disposals, New Delhi for Rs. 12,10,000 and governed by its bill (copy annexed) is a works contract and not a sale of launch (ii) If the answer to the aforesaid question is in the affirmative, whether the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that there was no sale of vessel so far as then constructed and materials in preparation, though the Tribunal accepted the respo...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »