Mumbai Court March 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.
Guldas S/O Galma Hatwar Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-15-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2482
L. Manoharan, J.1. This Appeal by the second accused in Sessions Trial No. 67 of 1987 of the Sessions Court, Bhandara, challenges the conviction of the second accused under S. 302 and under S. 325 of Indian Penal Code; and the sentences of imprisonment for life under S. 302 and and rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default rigorous imprisonment for six months under S. 325 of IPC. 2. Six accused persons were charged for various offences. Accused 1 to 6 were charged under S. 302 read with S. 34 of IPC; 3rd accused was charged again under S. 323 of IPC for having caused hurt to P.W. 5; and again 2nd accused was charged under S. 325 of IPC for having caused injury by means of an axe to P.W. 4 Drakshabai, Pending trial, the accused No. 1 expired. The learned Sessions Judge acquitted accused No. 3 to 6 and as indicated above, found the 2nd accused guilty of the offences punishable under Ss. 302 and 323 of IPC and convicted and sentenced him as indicated...
Rhone-poulenc Employees Union Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-15-1995
Reported in: 1995(3)BomCR707; (1996)IILLJ1001Bom
S.H. Kapadia, J. 1. The above batch of Writ Petitions involve interpretation of provisions of Section 17(2) of theEmployees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 read with the EmployeesProvident Funds Scheme, 1952. For the sake of convenience facts in Writ Petition No. 1910/1992, briefly, are being stated. At the outset, it may be clarified that all the above writ petitions raise common question of law regarding power and the authority of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner to impose the impugned conditions while granting individual exemption under Section 17(2) of the said Act, 1952. It may be clarified that in the above Writ Petitions we are not required to examined the constitutional validity or the vires of each of the said conditions. Basically the question involved in the group of petitions is the power of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner to impose the impugned conditions while granting individual exemption under Section 17(2) of the said Act, 1952 re...
The State of Maharashtra Vs. Deepak Son of Bharatsingh Dixit
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-14-1995
Reported in: 1996(2)BomCR468
R.M. Lodha, J.1. Admit. Mr. Bhangde waives service on behalf of Caveator. Both the learned Counsel for parties jointly pray that this appeal may be heard and disposed of at this stage only.2. By the order dated 14-9-1994 impugned in this appeal, 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Dn., Chandrapur has allowed application filed by the respondent for grant of temporary injunction and restrained defendant/appellant from recovering suit amount of Rs. 19,04,400/- on account of toll in respect of Wardha River Bridge near Ghuggus for the year 1993, till decision of suit subject to condition that plaintiff deposits amount of Rs. 6,21,982.94 to the defendant within 15 days from the date of the order.3. Before appreciating the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for appellant, few relevant facts may be noted. Respondent, Deepak Bharatsingh Dixit (for short plaintiff) filed a suit for declaration and injunction against appellant, the State of Maharashtra (for short defendant). In the said suit pla...
Ramesh Arjan Thadani Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-14-1995
Reported in: II(1996)DMC234
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. I have heard Mr. Adhik Shirodkar for the applicant and Mr. D.A. Nalawade, APP for the State of Maharashtra at some length.2. This is an application for bail on behalf of the applicant Ramesh Arjan Thadani who has been charge-sheeted for offences punishable under Sections 498A and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The deceased in the instant case is one Dr. (Mrs.) Sunita, admittedly the own wife of the applicant.3. The case of the prosecution runs as follows :On 25th February, 1993 the applicant and the deceased were married. In the marriage the parents of the deceased spent something to the tune of Rs. 2,30,000/- to Rs. 2,50,000/-. The couple had their honeymoon in Shalimar Hotel, Bombay, and for the same payment was made by the parents of the deceased. The applicant wanted a new kitchen cabinet and the mother of the deceased paid Rs. 18,000/- for the same. For the purchase of a car, the applicant took about Rs. 5,000/- from her. The applicant had threatened the deceased...
Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-14-1995
Reported in: (1996)55TTJ(Mumbai)174
ORDERM. K. CHATURVEDI, J. M. :These three appeals by the assessee are directed against the applicability of s. 201(1) r/w s. 192(1) of the IT Act, 1961, and pertain to the asst. yrs. 1985-86 to 1987-88.2. For the sake of convenience, these appeals are consolidated and disposed of by a common order.3. Briefly, the facts :The assessee is a company. It is filing annual returns of salaries under s. 206 in respect of salaries paid to its employees at various units in Bombay. In order to ascertain the varacity of the returns survey was conducted. It was found that while calculating salaries for TDS purposes correct prescription of law was not followed. As a result thereof, lesser amount was deducted. Attention was invited on the following :(i) reimbursement of drivers salary to some employees taxed under s. 17(2)(iv);(ii) ex gratia, equivalent to one month salary, paid to employees drawing salary above Rs. 1,500 per month taxed under s. 17(1);(iii) office set off expenditure allowance paid t...
Dharmaraj Vithoba Natekar Vs. Unique Industries and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-1995
Reported in: (1996)IILLJ948Bom
B.N. Srikrishna J.1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against an Award of the Second Labour Court, Pune, dated 30th July, 1987 made in Reference (IDA) No. 165 of 1985 under the provision of the Industrial disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The facts which are necessary to dispose of this writ petition are as follows : The petitioner was continuously working in the service of the First Respondent as a Planner Operator from 1.8.1992 upto 30.3.1985. The last drawn salary of the petitioner was Rs. 21.85 per day. The petitioner was absent from work from 7.2.1985 to 15.2.1985, but had attended the office on 8.2.1985 at 4.00 p.m. for collecting his salary. He produced Medical Certificate of E. S. I. Panel Doctor seeking to explain his absence in which it was stated; 'Patient not attended my dispensary from 8.2.1985 to 14.2.1985'. The petitioner again remained absent from 15.2.1985 to 22.2.1985, for which there was no medi...
Transport Manager, Kolhapur Municipal Transport Vs. Ramchandra Joti Ma ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-1995
Reported in: (1998)IIILLJ676Bom
B.N. Srikrishna, J. 1. This Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns an Award of the Labour Court, Sangli, dated December 1, 1988, made in Reference (IDA) No. 128 of 1989 under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The Petitioner is the Transport Manager of the bus transport undertaking controlled by the Kolhapur Municipal Corporation. The First Respondent was working as a Conductor in its service. From July 14, 1980 to June 30, 1984, the First Respondent remained absent from work, though his name was continued in the muster roll of the Petitioner. From July 1, 1984, the Petitioner struck the name of the First Respondent off the roll, by imputing an intention to abandon service to him, on account of his long absence from service. It is the case of the Petitioner that the First Respondent had misappropriated an amount of Rs. 4,480/- belonging to the Petitioner and that, when this was discovered, he remai...
T.A. Rane Vs. the Goa University and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-1995
Reported in: 1996(4)BomCR143
T.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. The facts of the case on which the parties are not at variance are as follows:---2. The petitioner was appointed as Statistical Assistant in the Town & Country Planning Department by the Government with effect from 31-8-1970. By order dated 30th March, 1982 the petitioner was promoted to the post of Research Assistant on ad hoc basis but subsequently he was regularised in that post by order dated 19-10-1984.3. While so, the first respondent had invited applications for the post of Programmer to be appointed on deputation from the employees in the Government of Goa, Daman and Diu and other semi-Government organizations. Pursuant to that Notification, the petitioner applied for the said post and was called for interview on 15th January, 1987 and ultimately he was offered the post of Programmer on the basis of deputation. He joined as Programmer in the service of the first respondent on 27-3-1987 pursuant to Exh. C order dated 12-2-1987. As per the said orde...
Camilo M.F. Fernandes Vs. the State of Goa, Through Its Chief Secretar ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-1995
Reported in: 1996(4)BomCR154; (1995)97BOMLR97
E.S. Da Silva, J.1. The petitioner seeks in this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution quashing and setting aside of the orders dated 1st August, 1991 and 4th February, 1995 on the ground that the findings given by both the courts below are perverse and based on no evidence thus rendering an error apparent on the face of the record. Both the orders relate to the confiscation of the petitioner's pickup for being involved in illegal transportation of Government forest produce with the knowledge of its owner. The order dated 1st August, 1991 was made by the Deputy Conservator of Forests an authorised Officer while the order dated 4th February, 1995 is of the District and Sessions Judge who in appeal has upheld the order of the Deputy Conservator of Forests.2. The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of pickup bearing Registration No. GA-02-T-5059 which he was using for the purpose of running the business of transportation of goods. The petitioner had engag...
Saberaj Industries Vs. F.J. Bahadur, Commissioner of Income-tax and An ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-12-1995
Reported in: [1996]217ITR831(Bom)
S.H. Kapadia, J. 1. Being aggrieved by order dated January 28, 1987, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax rejecting the petitioners' application under section 273A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for waiver of interest and penalty in respect of the assessment years 1978-79 up to 1982-83, the present writ petition has been filed. 2. The facts giving rise to this petition briefly are as follows : On November 15, 1985, the petitioners filed returns of income for eight years in respect of the assessment years 1978-79 up to 1985-86. According to the petitioners, they filed the above returns of income for eight years disclosing voluntarily their true income and also paid self-assessment tax thereon. However, the said returns for the first five years out of eight years, i.e., for the assessment years 1978-79 up 1982-83, were filed beyond time. On January 22, 1986, and on January 30, 1986, notices under section 148 of the Income-tax Act came to be issued in respect of the abovementioned first...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »