Mumbai Court March 1995 Judgments
Shree Steel Castings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1995
Reported in: (1995)LC255Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal against the Order-in-Original No. 17/90, dated 30-3-1990 of the Additional Collector of Central Excise, Nagpur.2. The appellants, who are engaged in the manufacture of steel castings filed a declaration, after the introduction of Modvat Scheme indicating the description as Ferro Silicon manganese. However, they had received the input silicon manganese and taken Modvat Credit. Hence the department alleged that the input brought in is not covered by the Modvat declaration filed by them on 12-3-1986. They were issued a show cause notice dated 24-1-1990 for recovery of credit taken during the period October 1986 to November 1986. There are two grounds pleaded in the appeal. One is on merits pleading that silicon manganese is also classifiable under same Chapter Heading 7202.20 and it is necessary for making the final product and this input is also eligible for Modvat credit. Hence specifically non-mentioning silicon manganese should not come in the way of getting the ...
Tag this Judgment!V.S. Dempo and Co. Ltd. and Another Vs. the Telecom District Manager, ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Bom428
ORDERDr. E. S. DA Silva, J. 1. All these three writ petitions can be conveniently disposed of by a common judgment since they are raising substantially similar questions of fact and law. 2. The main challenge in the petitions is the circular dated April 13, 1989 containing executive instructions which the petitioners are seeking to get struck down as repugnant to S. 7B of the Indian Telegraphs Act while the other grievances made out in all the petitions are basically the refusal of the respondents to refer the disputed bills of the petitioners to arbitration as provided under the aforesaid S. 7B, the demand made by the respondents for the payment of the said disputed and inflated bills even before any arbitration award and the threat to disconnect the petitioners' telephones if the payments were not made as per the demand. 3. In Writ Petition No. 398/94 the petitioners contend that the petitioner No. 1 is a Company while the petitioner No. 2 is its Deputy General Manager (Personnel and...
Tag this Judgment!V.S. Dempo and Co. Ltd. and Others Vs. the Telecom District Manager an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1995
Reported in: 1998(2)BomCR222
ORDERDr. E.S. DA Silva, J.1. All these three writ petitions can be conveniently disposed of by a common judgment since they are raising substantially similar questions of fact and law.2. The main challenge in the petitions is the Circular dated April 13, 1989 containing executive instructions which the petitioners are seeking to get struck down as repugnant to section 7-B of the Indian Telegraphs Act while the other grievances made out in all the petitions are basically the refusal of the respondents to refer the disputed bills of the petitioners to arbitration as provided under the aforesaid section 7-B, the demand made by the respondents for the payment of the said disputed and inflated bills even before any arbitration award and the threat to disconnect the petitioners' telephone if the payments were not made as per the demand.3. In Writ Petition No. 398/94 the petitioners contend that the petitioner No. 1 is a Company while the petitioner No. 2 is its Deputy General Manager (Person...
Tag this Judgment!Kolhapur Zilla Shetkari Vinkari Sahakari Soot Girani Ltd. and Others V ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1995
Reported in: (1997)IIILLJ592Bom
1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India impugns an order dated December 17, 1988, made by the Labour Court, Sangli, holding charge of Labour Court, Kolhapur, in Application (LCK) No. 4 of 1988 under the provisions of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The First Petitioner is the Managing Director, the Second Petitioner the Chairman and the rest of the Petitioners are Directors of the Co-operative Society which runs a Textile Mill at Ichalkaranji. The Second Respondent is a registered and representative Union of the employees in the concerned local area. The Fourth Respondent is another Union which represents the employees working in the Textile Mills in the same local area. 3. The Second Respondent made an Application (BIR) No. 4 of 1988 under Section 78(1)A(c) of the Act to the Labour Court at Kolhapur. The Kolhapur Zilla Shetkari Vinkari Sahakari Soot Girani Limited and the Managing Director of th...
Tag this Judgment!Managing Dir., Kolhapur Zilla Shetkari Vinkari Sahakari Soot Girani Lt ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1995
Reported in: 1995(4)BomCR184; (1995)97BOMLR365
B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India impugns an order dated 17th December, 1988, made by the Labour Court, Sangali, holding charge of Labour Court, Kolhapur, in Application (LCK) No. 4 of 1988 under the provisions of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The First petitioner is the Managing Director, the Second petitioner the Chairman and the rest of the petitioners are Directors of the Co-operative Society which runs a textile Mill at Ichalkaranji. The Second respondent is a registered and representative union of the employees in the concerned local area. The Fourth respondent is another Union which represents the employees working in the Textile Mills in the same local area. 3. The Second Respondent made an Application (BIR) No. 4 of 1988 under Section 78(1)A(C) of the Act to the Labour Court at Kolhapur. The Kolhapur Zilla Shetkari Vinkari Sahakari Soot Girani Limited and the M...
Tag this Judgment!Bombay Presidency Golf Club Ltd. Vs. B.L. Sawalesh Warkar and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1995
Reported in: [1995(71)FLR632]; (1996)ILLJ796Bom
B.N. Srikrishna, J. 1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against Part II Award of the 10th Labour Court, Bombay, dated August 10, 1988, made in Reference (IDA) No. 386 of 1985 under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act')2. The Petitioner is a prestigious Members Club in Bombay famous for its eighteen holes Golf Course. The Second Respondent was working as a Caddie master in the employment of the Petitioner Club and his duty was to supervise the work of Golf Caddies. The petitioner Club conducts National and International Golf Championship Tournaments. On February 12, 1984 there was one such Golf Tournament conducted on the premises of the Petitioner Club. At about 11.00 A.M. on that day the Second Respondent was found loitering in the main hall of the Club, though he had no business to remain there in the performance of his duties. He was instructed by Suryakant Patel, President of t...
Tag this Judgment!Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Kamgar Sangh Vs. Chief General Manager, Mtnl ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1995
Reported in: [1995(71)FLR420]
1. Petitioner is a Union of employees of Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. (MTNL). Members of the petitioner-Union were the employees of Department of Telecommunication (DOT) until the MTNL was constituted as from 1st April 1986. It appears that at some stage the employees working for the DOT were given option either to remain with the MTNL or otherwise. According to the petitioner 100% employees have exercised options to remain with the MTNL. 2. The present petition prays as the main relief that appropriate direction be issued to the MTNL to absorb their employees and regularise and treat them as employees of MTNL. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite MTNL came into being as from 1st April 1986 so far no regularisation of the staff taken over from the DOT has been done and thought a long time has elapsed no steps whatsoever have been taken and hence the earlier mentioned relief in the Petition. 3. At the threshold, and objection has been raised that this petition is not mainta...
Tag this Judgment!Ratnagiri Municipal Council Vs. Harishandra Shankar Pawar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1995
Reported in: [1995(71)FLR390]
B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. These Writ Petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugn an Order of the Industrial Court, Kolhapur, dated 12th July 1991, made in Complaint (ULP) Nos. 198 to 224 of 1989 and 269 of 1989 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. The concerned workmen of the Petitioner-Municipal Council had moved the Industrial Court, Kolhapur, but their complaints alleging an unfair labour practice, inter alia, within the meaning of item 6 of Schedule iv of the Act on the ground that they were continued as temporary employees for years together with a view to deprive the of the status and benefits of permanency. After recording the evidence, the Industrial Court was satisfied that it was factually so. Apart from the Ratnagiri Municipal Council, the State of Maharashtra was also impleaded as a party Respondent to the Complaints. By the impugned ...
Tag this Judgment!St. Anthony's High School Trust and Anr. Vs. State of Goa and Anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1995
Reported in: 1996(5)BomCR33
A.C. Agarwal, J.1. The petitioner No. 1 is a Trust by name St. Anthony's High School Trust. Petitioner No. 2 is Shri Inacio Almeida Coutinho, a major Trustee of the first petitioner Trust. By this petition they seek to impugn an Order passed by the Government of Goa on 10th January, 1994 purported to have been passed under section 20 of the Goa, Daman and Diu School Education Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), taking over the management of their School which is being run at Assolna, Goa.2. A few facts which has led to the filing of the petition may be stated.The aforesaid St. Anthony's High School is being run since 1921. As far as the first petitioner Trust is concerned, it was formed under a Deed of Trust dated 28th August, 1964 and the management of the School was taken over by the said Trust. During the period 1981 to 1985 one Smt. Irene Ferreira was the principal of the School. When she was appointed Headmistress in 1981 she had superseded Smt. A.M. Almeida who is the...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok S/O Anantrao Chourasia and anr. Vs. Durgeshnarayan S/O Ramnaraya ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1995
Reported in: 1996(5)BomCR333
R.M. Lodha, J.1. This revision application is directed against the order passed by the Additional District Judge, Nagpur, on 15-12-1993, whereby he confirmed the ad interim injunction granted on 18-12-1992 on the application filed by Durgeshnarayan Ramnarayan Jaiswal (non-applicant No. 1 herein) under section 286(5) of the City of Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948.2. The only contention raised by the learned Counsel for the applicants in this revision application is that the Additional District Judge, Nagpur, had no jurisdiction to pass the preventive injunction on the application filed under section 286(5) of the City of Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948, and therefore, the impugned order passed by the Additional District Judge, Nagpur, is liable to be set aside.3. On the other hand, Shri Voditel, the learned Counsel for the non-applicant No.1, submits that in the application filed by the non-applicant No. 1 under section 286(5) of the City of Nagpur Corporation Act the main relief was that non...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »