Mumbai Court June 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.
Maharashtra General Kamgar Union, Bombay Vs. Solid Containers Ltd. and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-23-1995
Reported in: 1995(4)BomCR288; (1996)IILLJ959Bom; 1995(2)MhLj836
Ashok Agarwal, J.1. (i) Is the lock-out declared by first respondent company illegal or deemed to be illegal? (ii) Is the first respondent-company justified in insisting upon its worker to execute an undertaking of good behaviour and diligent work by way of condition precedent for lifting the lock-out? and (iii) does the Appellant, which is not a recognised union, have a locus to file a complaint under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971? are the questions which are posed for our consideration in the present Letters Patent Appeal. 2. The first respondent is a limited company engaged in manufacture of containers and allied products. The present management has taken over the company sometime in the year 1983. The lis which has led to the filing of the present Letters Patent Appeal commenced sometime in 1985. On 24th of October, 1985 the respondent company filed an application before the Government under Section 25O of the Indust...
Chandrakant Rajaram Shinde Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-23-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)BomCR241
G.R. Majithia, J.1. The accused-appellant was found guilty for committing an offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year by Additional Sessions Judge, Pune by his judgment and order dated July 6, 1993. Aggrieved against the judgment order he has come up in appeal.2. The prosecution story, briefly put, is as under.The appellant and deceased Govind Dagadu More were in the employment of Pune University as Security Guards. The appellant resided in Servants quarter bearing No. C-19. The deceased along with his family members were residing in Servants quarter bearing No. C-14. Both of them were habituated to consume liquor together. On December 3, 1992 the deceased had gone to the quarters of the appellant. Both of them consumed liquor in between the night of December 3, 1992 and December 4, 1992. It appeared that there was a ...
Quasi Shahbas S/O. Abu-ul-ulum Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-22-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Bom333
ORDERDeshmukh, J.1. The petitioner was elected as a Councillor in the general election of Naldurg Municipal Council held in November, 1991. After the election of the President of the said Municipal Council, the President of the Municipal Council appointed the petitioner as Vice-President on 20-12-1994. The order of appointment of the petitioner was sent to the State Government on the very day, i.e., 20-12-1994. The same has been received by the State Government, as per the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the Government, on 31-12-1994.2. In the present case, the Government on 14th March, 1995 informed the President of the Municipal Council in reference to the letter of appointment of the Vice-President dated 20-12-1994 that the Government disapproves the appointment of the petitioner as Vice-President, as Crime No. 4 of 1988 is registered against the petitioner for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 353, 382, 420 186 504 and 504 (sic) of the Indian Penal Code, and for pendency...
Vimalchandra Manikchand Gandhi Vs. Jawahar Shivlal Shah and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-22-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Bom456; 1995(4)BomCR231
1. This second appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree dated 28-10-1988 passed by the Third Extra Assistant Judge, Solapur, in Civil Appeal No. 515 of 1981 preferred against the judgment and decree dated 29-11-1980 passed bythe Third Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Solapur, in Regular Civil Suit No. 1054 of 1976 whereby the lower appellate Court partly allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court.2. Few facts which are material for the purpose of disposing of this second appeal are as under:Original Plaintiff (appellant herein) filed the aforesaid suit against respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3, who were the vendors, from whom he purchased the property and also against respondent No. 4-Municipal Corporation of Solapur. It is the case of the plaintiff that he purchased the suit property consisting of building and open land situated at Solapur Murarji Peth, Solapur from respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3 (original defendants Nos. 1, 2 and 3) by sale...
Niranjan Jayantilal Tolia Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-22-1995
Reported in: 1995(80)ELT31(Bom)
S.H. Kapadia, J.1. Two consignments of White Cement arrived by vessel 'S. S. Bronge Bell' in Bombay on May 23, 1984. The consignments landed at Victoria Docks. The goods were detained by Customs for Chemical Tests. Samples were drawn accordingly. In the meantime goods were stored by B. P. T. at Vidyavihar. At that time the premises at Vidyavihar were in occupation of B. P. T. On 31-10-1984, the Customs Authorities issued Detention Certificate for the period 8-8-1984 to 9-10-1984. The goods in respect of the first consignment were cleared on November 18, 1984 on the Petitioner paying Rs. 1,99,306.08 as demurrage. The second consignment was cleared by the Petitioner on November 15/16, 1984 on payment of demurrage of Rs. 3,45,604. By this petition the Petitioner seeks refund of Rs. 5,60,000/- from B. P. T. on the ground that the said demurrages were recovered by B. P. T. without authority of law. Secondly, Petitioner seeks a direction against Customs to issue Detention Certificate from th...
Vasant Dagadu Bodake Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-22-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)BomCR22
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. The appellant aggrieved by the judgement and order dated 4-9-1993 passed by the Sessions Judge, Nasik in Sessions Case No. 105 of 1993 convicting and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code has come up in appeal before us.The appellant is the husband of the deceased Mandabai Vasant Bodake.2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 10-1-1993 at about 4.30 to 4.45 p.m. there was a quarrel between the appellant and the deceased on the eastern side of Sarkarwada Police Station, within the limits of Nasik District. It is alleged that during the course of quarrel, the appellant picked up a stone which was lying on the ground and hurled it at the deceased Mandabai who fell down on receiving the aforesaid stone blow. Blood started oozing out from the region of head of Mandabai. Anubai Kanhu Korade (P.W. 5) who was along with the appellant and Mandabai at the time of the incident along with Dattu Kanod and others took Mandab...
Farida Abdul Latif Patka Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-1995
Reported in: 1995(79)ELT587(Bom)
S. H. Kapadia, J.1. By this Writ Petition, petitioner, who is an exporter of meat products under the firm name and style of Sahar Products seeks to challenge the Order passed by respondent No. 2 seeking to review the earlier Order dated 9th November, 1986. In the above matter, exports were made by the petitioner in 1986. In respect of three cartons, the petitioner claims that on account of inadvertence, the label did not indicate buffalo meat product, but it indicated only meat product. In the above circumstances proceedings were adopted by respondent No. 3. After full consideration of the matter, respondent No. 3 by an order dated 17th October, 1986 came to the conclusion that there was a genuine mistake/inadvertence in the labelling of the three cartons and there was no mala fide or deliberate mislabelling of three cartons/packets. By the impugned notice, however, respondent No. 2 decided to review the earlier Order dated 17th October, 1986. 2. Being aggrieved by the said Order/notic...
Ralliwolf Ltd. Vs. Association of Engineering Workers and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-1995
Reported in: [1996(73)FLR1012]
B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has impugned an Award dated 30th September, 1989 made by the Third Labour Court, Thane, in Reference (IDA) No. 137 of 1980 under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. 2. According to the First Respondent-Union, the workmen concerned in the Reference, M.Y.Joshi was suffering from Schizophrenia from or about 9th August, 1979, resulting in his remaining absent from work. The petitioner company sent a registered A.D. letter to his address, which was returned unserved. It also attempted to serve a charge-sheet on the said workman for remaining absent for more than a consecutive period of 10 days from 9th August, 1979. The charge-sheet also remained unserved. A notice about the charge-sheet and inquiry was published in a local Marathi daily, after which the company held an ex-parte inquiry against the workman and dismissed him from se...
Goa Carbon Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-1995
Reported in: [1996(73)FLR1387]; (1998)IIILLJ722Bom
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. The petitioner-company owns a factory situate at St. Jose de Areal, Salcete, Goa. The said factory is governed by the Factories Act, 1948.2. By its resolution dated May 6, 1988, the Board of Directors of Petitioner No. 1 passed a resolution to the effect that Mr. Ajit Sardessai, works manager of the said factory be entrusted with the ultimate control over the affairs of the said factory since none of the directors of Petitioner No. 1 was stationed at the said factory. By the said resolution, the said Mr. Ajit Sardessai was in fact appointed by the company as the 'occupier' of the said factory for the purpose of the Factories Act, 1948. On July 12, 1988, the petitioner-company made an application for registration and occupation as contemplated under Sections 6 and 7 of the Factories Act, 1948, in Form No. 2 as set out in paragraphs 4 and 5 of the petition. In the said application, the name of Mr. Ajit Sardessai was shown as 'the occupier'.3. By the impugned letter dat...
Anjua Rayon Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-20-1995
Reported in: (1996)(87)ELT724Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Both the appeals involve consideration of the same issue and hence they are proposed to be disposed of by this common order.2. Though notices were issued to the appellants, appellant M/s. J.Kimatrai & Co. have requested for dispensing with their personal appearance. The other appellant has not appeared during the personal hearing.3. After hearing Mrs. Chavan and perusing the appeal memorandum, in view of the fact that the issue has already been decided by this Bench vide Order No. 1254-66/94/WRB, dated 10-6-1994,1 do not propose to wait for the appearance of M/s. Anuja Rayon, the other appellant.4. In both the cases, the issue relates to non compliance with the provisions of Chapter IV A in regard to imported Acetate yarn. On account of that, confiscation proceedings were initiated and the goods in respect of which the procedure laid down in Chapter IV A was not followed, were ordered confiscation and penalties were imposed on the appellants. The main contention raised in the a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »