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.
Divisional Forest Officer, Gadchiroli Vs. Madhukar Ramaji Undirwade an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-08-1995
Reported in: 1995(4)BomCR468; 1996(2)MhLj376
R.M. Lodha, J. 1. Group of these ten writ petitions arises out of the common order passed by the Industrial Court, Maharashtra, Nagpur on 24.3.1992 and since common questions are involved in all these writ petitions, this group of writ petitions has been heard together and is disposed of by common judgment. 2. The facts of all the ten writ petitions are almost identical except that the respondents-complainants in all these writ petitions have been initially appointed on different dates from 2.5.1983 to 2.11.1985 on the post of Forest Guard by the petitioner. For the sake of convenience and to appreciate the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties, the facts in Writ Petition No. 1972 of 1992 may be adverted to. The respondent No. 1 in the said writ petition filed a complaint before the Industrial Court, Nagpur on 16.12.1987 under Section 28 read with Items 7 and 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Ac...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Singh Electro Steel Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-07-1995
Reported in: (1995)(59)LC126Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal filed by the Collector of Central Excise, Bombay-II is directed against the order dt. 28.2.1985, passed by Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay.2. The brief facts are that the respondents herein manufacture Steel Ingots with the aid of Electric Furnace and received cast iron moulds falling under Tariff Item 68 of CET. The molten steel is cast into the moulds for the purpose of obtaining ingots. The respondents availed set off of duty under Notification No. 201/79 during the period June, 1980 to September, 1980. This Notification at the material time exempted goods falling under Item 68 C.E. Tariff when used in the manufacture of other goods from duty. However, the Jurisdictional Assistant Collector found that these moulds are not used as inputs in the manufacture of steel ingots in the nature of raw material or component part and, therefore, initiated proceedings for recovery of the set off of duty availed of by the respondents. The Assistant Collector's order ...
In Re: Ismail Akbarali Chitalwalla, Debtor/insolvent
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-07-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Bom347
1. This application is made by the Insolvent/Debtor seeking the relief that the Order of Adjudication dated 4th October, 1994 passed by this Court in Insolvency Petition No. 25 of 1994 be set aside and he be given an opportunity to contest the matter on merits.2. The Debtor has also claimed various other reliefs such as ordering inquiry and initiation of criminal proceedings against one Jitendra D. Kanse, the employee of the Petitioning Creditor for making false affidavit of service of process in the petition upon the Debtor. At the outset, it may be stated that the principal ground urged by the Debtor in support of this application is of non-service of the Insolvency Petition herein as also the Insolvency Notice issued therein upon him, Inasmuch as the Debtor has alleged fraud by the Petitioning Creditor in the matter of service of process of the Petition and the Insolvency Notice.3. It is noticed that the Petitioning Creditor is the Award holder passed by the Cooperative Court agains...
Waman Pundlikrao Deshmukh Vs. Shivaji Agriculture College, Amravati
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-07-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)BomCR640; [1995(71)FLR1021]; (1996)IIILLJ596Bom; 1995(2)MhLj342
The only contention raised by Shri Pillai, the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Industrial Court, Amravati, has seriously erred in rejecting the main complaint itself at the time of deciding the interim application under section 30(2) of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short 'the Unfair Labour Practices Act'). 2. Nobody, appeared on behalf of the respondent. 3. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I find substance in the argument advanced. It would be seen that the petitioner filed a complaint before the Industrial Court, Amravati, under section 28 read with Schedule IV of the Unfair Labour Practices Act. 1971, praying that the order dated July the 31, 1990 issued by the respondent be set aside and the respondent be restrained from changing the present duties of the complainant, since it demonstrated Unfair Labour Practice. 4. Along with the complaint under section 28 of the Unfair Labou...
Smt. Maria Elsa Noronha Wolfango D'Silva Vs. the Custodian of Evacuee ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-07-1995
Reported in: 1996(4)BomCR337; (1995)97BOMLR104
E.S. Da Silva, J.1. Rule, by consent returnable forthwith.2. The petitioner who claims to be co-owner of a larger property known as 'Condade de Mayem' as also owner of specific portions of the property which was separated from the larger property has filed this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a writ of mandamus against respondents No. 1 to 3 to execute the warrant of eviction dated 10th June, 1994 and in pursuance thereto evict the respondent No. 4 from the residential house situated in the said property.3. It is the case of the petitioner that she has a family Chapel which was administered earlier by her husband and thereafter by the petitioner. Certain properties were gifted to the Chapel and in respect thereof the petitioner was appointed as 'cabeca de casal' in the inventory proceedings before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panaji. Amongst the properties gifted to the Chapel and administered by the petitioner there exists a property ...
Sher Singh S/O Hira Singh Fauji Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Bom367; 1995(4)BomCR347; 1995(2)MhLj306
ORDERMane, J. 1. This petition under Art. 226 read with Art. 14 of the Constitution of India is filed by the member of the Gurudwara Board, Nanded, challenging the Government Notification dated March 30, 1994 issued by the respondent No. 2 Government of Maharashtra in exercise of the powers under S. 6(1)(v) of the Nanded Sikh Gurudwara Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib Act, 1956 whereby the respondent No. 4 has been duly nominated as member of the Board.2. The notification as well as the nomination of the respondent No. 4 is objected to only on the ground that the respondent No. 4 is not eligible and entitled for appointment as Member of the Board in view of the provisions contained in S.7(1)(e) of the Nanded Sikh Gurudwara Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib Act, 1956 (for short, the Act). In this content the petitioner submits that the respondent No. 4 was convicted under S. 323 of the Indian Penal Code by the Criminal Court which conviction was affirmed by the High Court. It...
Narayan S/O Govind Murugkar Vs. the Iind Additional District Judge, Na ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ3278
ORDER1. This Court issued notice before admission returnable early in 30/11/1994 in this petition filed by the petitioner Shri Narayan Govind Murugkar, under Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Vide order dt/- 30/11/1994, leave was granted to the petitioner to add the landlord Shri Rajaram Vithal Joshi as the respondent No. 3 to the petition. In view of the leave granted by this Court, Shri Rajaram Joshi was added as respondent No. 3 on 1/12/1994. The facts giving rise to the present contempt petition are as under : Admittedly, the petitioner Shri Narayan Murugkar is the tenant of Shri Rajaram Joshi-the respondent No. 3. The petitioner filed Reg. Civil Appeal No. 490/87 against the judgment and decree passed by the Small Causes Court, Nagpur, regarding the arrears of rent. The petitioner also filed Reg. Civil Appeal No. 290/91 against the judgment and decree passed by the Small Causes Court, Nagpur, regarding eviction. In Reg. Civil Appeal No. 490/87, an application...
Rajesh S/O Gulabrao Lihitkar Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ4063
1. This appeal preferred by the appellant/accused Rajesh Gulabrao Lihitkar, is directed against the judgment order and dated 26th January, 1992 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, in Sessions Trial No. 474 of 1990, convicting the appellant/accused for the offence punishable under Section 324, of I.P.C. and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 300/- in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months. 2. The facts giving rise to the present prosecution are as under : The appellant/accused and the complainant Rakesh Prabhakar Wagh are the permanent residents of village Umri, Tahsil and District Nagpur. In the village, there is a public tap in front of the house of Shri Bhaskar Jagtap (P.W. 3). The houses of the appellant and the complainant are abutting to each other. On 2nd Nov. 1989, at about 7 a.m. the accused's real sister Ku. Shaila had been to the public tap for fetching water. There were other 4 or 5 girls...
Shiodas and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2854; 1995(2)MhLj36
L. Manoharan, J.1. In this Appeal, accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Sessions Trial No. 23 of 1988 of the Court of Sessions Judge, Bhandara, Challenge their conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and the sentence of imprisonment for life awarded to them. Though there was also a charge against accused No. 1 for the offence punishable under Section 323 of Indian Penal Code for causing hurt to Saibai (PW5) the mother of deceased - he was acquitted of the said charge. 2. Prosecution case as revealed, in brief, is that on 26-1-1988, at about 9.00 p.m., when the deceased Vasanta was at dinner he picked up a quarrel with his wife Prabhawati and started abusing her. At that time accused No. 2, wife of 1st accused, came to the house of the deceased and asked him as to why he was abusing her, to which the deceased stated that it was not she whom he was abusing but he was abusing only his wife. Not satisfied with the said answer, the 2nd accused pulled Vasanta to the Court-y...
Ranjitsing Virk Vs. Pramila Srivastav, Income-tax Officer and Others.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-1995
Reported in: [1996]217ITR741(Bom)
S.H. Kapadia, J. 1. The petitioner was engaged in production of cinema feature films. The petitioner filed returns of losses in respect of the assessment years 1977-78 up to 1982-83. Pursuant to the said returns filed by the petitioner, in respect of the previous year ending on June 30, 1981, for the assessment year 1982-83, the Income-tax Officer, after considering the said return, passed an order on March 29, 1985, assessing the income of the petitioner at Rs. 2,91,645. It is the case of the petitioner that in respect of the assessment year 1980-81, the previous year which ended on June 30, 1979, notice under section 148 was issued on September, 30, 1981, and the same was received by the petitioner on October 15, 1981. Another notice under section 148 was issued on November 22, 1982, and the same was received by the petitioner on February 26, 1983. However, the petitioner filed his loss return declaring losses in respect of the assessment year 1980-81 on March 30, 1983, i.e., within ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »