Mumbai Court April 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.
Placido Rodrigues Vs. Laxman Shivanappa Kallimath and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-24-1995
Reported in: II(1996)ACC266; 1996ACJ542; AIR1996Bom8; 1996(5)BomCR65; 1996(1)MhLj1021
1. This appeal is directed against the order of the learned Presiding Officer of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, South Goa, Margao, dated April 10, 1990 in Miscellaneous Application No. 121/89 attached to a Claim Petition filed by the appellant whereby the learned presiding officer has dismissed the said application for condonation of delay, in view of the provisions contained in Section 166(3) of the Motor vehicles Act, 1988. 2. The case of the appellant is that on November 7, 1987, he met with an accident when a truck bearing No. GDU 4718 dashed against the side of the bus bearing No. GDS 1994 in which the appellant was travelling, as a result whereof his elbow was seriously damaged. The appellant suffered a compound fracture of the right elbow and he was operated on twice and is now with a permanent disability of the right elbow and unable to straighten his hand in any manner. A criminal case was registered by the Vasco da Gama Police and some months after the accident the appel...
Gopinath Govind Panchal Vs. Hes Ltd. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-24-1995
Reported in: (1996)IIILLJ682Bom
1. This Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns an order of the 9th Labour Court, Bombay, dated October 29, 1987 made in Application (IDA) No. 1127 of 1984 under the provisions of Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The petitioner was working for about 25 years as a Dye Maker in Highly Skilled Category in the service of the First Respondent which manufactures watches, alarm clocks and other horological equipments. The workmen of the First Respondent establishment were formerly represented by a trade union known as 'Mumbai Mazdoor Sabha.' In the year 1979, however, another Trade Union, 'Association of Engineering Workers', came on the scene and a settlement under Section 18(1) read with Section 2(p) of the Act came to be signed between the First Respondent and the Association of Engineering Workers on September 29, 1979. This settlement was made effective from July 1, 1979. Under this settlement the ...
Rama Bala Kate and ors. Vs. Walchandnagar Industries Ltd. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-24-1995
Reported in: 1995(4)BomCR249; [1996(73)FLR1390]; (1996)ILLJ713Bom
B.N. Srikrishna, J. 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order of the Industrial Court dated April 21, 1988, made in complaint (ULP) Nos. 204 to 224 of 1985, dismissing the complaints 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 material facts for disposing of this writ petition are : The first respondent is a company engaged in the manufacture of sugar. At the material time, petitioners 1 to 17, 19 and 20 were engaged as Hamals doing the work of loading and unloading of sugar bags in the factory of the first respondent, ostensibly through petitioner No. 18 and respondent No. 5. Though actually employed by the first respondent, petitioner No. 18 and respondent No. 5 were shown as contractors, carrying out the work of loading and unloading on contract. There were regular contracts entered into between the first re...
Onkar Son of Raoji Hage and anr. Vs. Shamrao Shivrao Palhade and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1995
Reported in: 1996(2)BomCR171; (1995)97BOMLR647
R.M. Lodha, J.1. The substantial question of law formulated at the time of admission of second appeal and which needs to be decided is 'Whether the Appellate Court erred in Applying the principle of 'feeding the estoppel' to the case of respondent No. 1 and, therefore, holding that the respondent No. 1 proved the title over the house property.'2. The relevant facts giving rise to the aforesaid substantial question of law are that respondent No. 1 Shamrao (for short 'original plaintiff') filed a suit for possession of suit house and the agricultural land against respondent No. 2 Arjun (for short 'defendant No. 1'), present appellants Onkarnath and Vasant (for short original 'defendants 3 and 4') and Smt. Janabai (since deceased - original defendant No. 2). The plaintiff also claimed arrears of rent and damages in respect of suit house amounting to Rs. 155/- and mesne profits of past two years amounting to Rs. 300/- from defendants 1 and 2 and enquiry into future mesne profits. The claim...
Indian Airports Employees Union Vs. International Airports Authority o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-1995
Reported in: 1995(3)BomCR616
A.V. Savant, J. 1. The petition has been taken up for final hearing out of turn pursuant to the directions issued by the Honourable Supreme Court. 2. The petitioner is Indian Airports Employees' Union, which is a registered Trade Union. The first respondent is the International Airports Authority of India (for short, 'Airports Authority'), which is a 'statutory Authority', set up under the provisions of International Airports Authority of India Act, 1971 (for short, 'Airports Authority Act'). The second respondent is the Union of India which has issued the notification at Exh.'B' dated 9th December 1976 for enforcing which, relief has been sought by the petitioner-Union. The third respondent it the Regional Labour Commissioner, whereas the fourth respondent is the concerned labour contractor. The petitioner-Union seeks relief by way of mandamus restraining the first respondent-Airport Authority from engaging contract labour in so far as the work of sweeping, cleaning and dusting of the...
Raosaheb Shripatrao Patil Vs. Balasaheb Desai Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-1995
Reported in: [1995(71)FLR384]
B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. This Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order of the Industrial Court, Kolhapur dated 7th August 1989 made in Revision Application (ULP) No. 18 of 1988 under Section 44 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The Petitioner is an ex-employee of the 1st Respondent which is a Co-operative Society carrying on the business of manufacturing off sugar in its Karkhana in Daulatnagar District Satara. 3. The Petitioner was appointed on 24th March 1982 as a Trainee Welfare Officer. Though the 1st Respondent held a B.A. Honours degree, a degree of M.S.W. from Rural Development College, Aurangabad and a Diploma in Labour Laws and Labour Welfare, he did not possess the qualification prescribed under Rule 3 of the Maharashtra Welfare Officers (Duties, Qualifications and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1966, which is a condition req...
Government Transport Service, Bombay Vs. S.L. Mishra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-19-1995
Reported in: 1996(5)BomCR291; (1996)IIILLJ670Bom
1. This Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the Government Transport Service impugns a common order dated May 2, 1989 made by the First Labour Court, Bombay, in Application (IDA) Nos. 837 to 841 of 1981, 1463 to 1475 of 1982, 183 to 189 of 1987, 27 to 31 of 1982, 1350 to 1357 of 1984, 67 of 1986 and 1430 to 1441 of 1984, under the provisions of Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. 2. The petitioner is a Special Department of the Government of Maharashtra set up to provide transport service to a limited class such as V. I. Ps., V. V. I. Ps., and Higher Officers of the Government of Maharashtra and other State Governments and Central Government. Respondents 1 to 51, except Respondent 34-A, are working as drivers in the Petitioner Establishment. Respondent 34-A, Smt. Elorida George D'Souza is the legal representative of S. B. Pareira, who was working as a driver of the Petitioner Establishment at the material time and has since expired. 3. On o...
The Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay Vs. Corn Products Company ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-19-1995
Reported in: 1995(4)BomCR62
K.G. Shah, J.1. This is the plaintiff's appeal directed against the judgment and decree dated 31st March, 1987 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Bombay dismissing the appellant's suit with costs passed in S.C. Suit No. 3384 of 1970.2. The Appellant is the landlord of the respondent in respect of the suit premises. The provisions of the Bombay Rents, Hotel & Lodging House Rates Control Act do not apply to the suit premises. The respondent is a tenant in the suit premises since prior to 1951. The appellant through its Constituted Attorney on 27th January, 1969 addressed to the respondent a notice under section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act calling upon the respondent to quit, vacate and deliver vacant and peaceful possession of Old R.R. No. 1727 admeasuring 2079 sq. yards equivalent to 1739.05 sq.meters at Sassoon Dock Estate. The premises in respect of which this notice came to be given are more particularly described in the later part of the notice. In the notice it ...
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. A.K. Menon
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-19-1995
Reported in: 1995(4)BomCR416
S.N. Variava, J.1. The points raised by this application have already been answered by an order dated 20th February, 1995. In that order the Court has inter alia held as follows:'82. Dr. Balasubramanian also submitted that by virtue of sections 2 and 11 of the Special Courts Act, in effect a Notified Party was put into a civil death. He submitted that the Notified Party has an absolute disability. He submitted that the Custodian became a Representative Assesse on behalf of the Notified Parties. He submitted that now it was the duty and the obligation of the Custodian to file returns and pay taxes. 83. At this stage Mr. Bobde interrupted and informed Court that these must not be deemed to be arguments on behalf of the Income Tax Department. One Mr. K.V. M. Pai, Commissioner of Income Tax, II Circle also asked Mr. Bobde to inform Court that Dr. Balasubramanian was not instructed by the Tax Department to make any such submissions on their behalf. Dr. Balasubramanian then stated that he wa...
Nandan Builders Vs. V.G. Apte Estate Trust and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-19-1995
Reported in: 1995(4)BomCR28
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. Rule. Heard forthwith for final hearing.2. Heard learned Counsel on all sides. Perused the petition and all the affidavits and documents on record. Perused the original record of proceedings before the Joint Charity Commissioner, Pune, before the Joint Charity Commissioner, Pune, in detail.3. There is no merit whatsoever in this petition.4. This litigation has a chequered history. It does not appear to be necessary to set out the said history by referring to too many details and events of the past. I propose to refer only to the crucial facts having bearing on the subject matter of this petition. As would be shown by discussion in the later part of this judgment, I have reached the conclusion that the petition herein is totally frivolous.5. Section 36 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 inter alia provides that :'No sale of any immovable property belonging to a public trust shall be valid without the previous sanction of the Charity Commissioner'.The said section in...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »