Mumbai Court August 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.
Prabhudas Alias Babu S/O Balkrushna and Others Vs. State of Maharashtr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-07-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ618
R.M. Lodha, J. 1. The Second Additional Sessions Judge, Gondia, on 29-7-1991 convicted all the accused/appellants for the offence punishable under section 302 read with 34, I.P.C. and sentenced them to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- each and in default of payment of fine further rigorous imprisonment for three months each. The accused/appellants have challenged the correctness of the conviction and the sentenced awarded to them by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Gondia. 2. Briefly stated the prosecution case is that on 17-7-1986 Kajal (PW 1), his brother Nathu (Since deceased) and two servants Sukhram (P.W. 2) and Chaitram (PW 3) at about 6.30 P.M. in the evening were returning from their agricultural field and going towards their houses. When they reached near the house of Nathu Palasgaye, all the four accused persons namely Prabhudas alias Bablu (A 1), Durodhan (2), Devendra alias Karan (A 3) and Zamsingh alias Ghisu (A 4) assaulted Nathu, brother o...
State of Maharashtra Through V.K. Biyani Vs. V. M/S. Plethico Pharmace ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-07-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ1000
1. In this criminal revision, the State of Maharashtra through Drugs Inspector, Food and Drug Administration, Maharashtra State, Akola, took exception to the order of First Addl. Sessions Judge, Akola, passed in Criminal Revision No. 60/93, entertaining the criminal revision challenging the order of issue of process against the non-applicants and consequently, quashing the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 209 of 1991 pending in the Court of J.M.F.C., Nagpur. According to the learned counsel for applicant, the issue i.e. 'issue of process' is an interlocutory order and the same is not subject to revision under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is involved in the present application and same issue is concluded and determined by the judgment of this Court in the case of Uttam Krishnaji Levarkar v. State of Maharashtra 1995 (1) Mah. LJ 95 (Per R. M. Lodha, J.), wherein it has been held that 'Order issuing process on ex parte consideration of the complaint and material under Se...
Sanjay Industries Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-04-1995
Reported in: (1996)(86)ELT70Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 1445/87BCH, dated 24-3-1987 of the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay confirming the Order-in-Original No. S/10-58/86D, dated 10-3-1986 of the Deputy Collector of Customs, Group D, Bombay, ordering confiscation vide Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, of the consignment of 175-kgs of brass wire (extrusion quality in coil annealed) dia 6 mm round valued at Rs. 2,66,465/- granting option to pay fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- in lieu of confiscation.2. The appellants imported the aforementioned consignment and sought clearance under OGL, vide Appx. 6 List 8 Part I Sr. No. 512 of the Policy AM 1985-88. The same was objected to, on the ground that the Brass Wire fell under Sr. No. 459 of Appx. 3 Part A of the same policy.Query memo was issued, in reply to which it was submitted that the brass wire imported were without any flux and were meant for making brass strips and that the Entry No. 459 of Appx. 3A related only to electrode wires....
Shivaji A. More Vs. Estate Manager, Maharashtra State Farming Corpn. L ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-04-1995
Reported in: (1997)IIILLJ1082Bom
1. This is a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning an interlocutory order made by the Industrial Court, Pune, on November 26, 1987 in Complaint (ULP) No. 248 of 1987 and on January 4, 1988 in Review Application (ULP) No. 14 of 1987 declining to grant interim relief to the Petitioner to stay his transfer from one Department to another, 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 Petitioner was working as a Civil Mukadam in the service of the First Respondent for about 20 years. He was issued an order dated June 2, 1987 by which he was directed to work on the establishment of Lalpuri Section instead of Ratnapuri, though both establishments are admittedly in the same local area. The Petitioner, who was a Union Leader, took affront to this transfer and challenged his transfer by his Complaint (ULP) No. 248 of 1987 invoking Items 2(a), 4...
Pune District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Damu Hari Paigude and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-04-1995
Reported in: (1998)IIILLJ1068Bom
B.N. Srikrishna, J. 1. These two Writ Petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India arise out of the same set of circumstances and raise identical issues for consideration of this Court. Hence, they can both be disposed of by a common judgment.2. The Petitioner in both the Writ Petitions is a Co-operative Bank carrying on business in the Cooperative Banking Industry. The 1st Respondent in both Writ Petitions hereinafter referred to as 'the employees') were working as Cashiers in the Dehu Road Branch during different periods. The two employees and another employee working as Agent of the Dehu Road Branch at the material time were charge-sheeted for serious misconducts, such as, fraud or dishonesty in connection with the bank's business and defalcation of monies belonging to the bank. After holding of domestic inquiries, the 1 st Respondent in Writ Petition Nos. 1254 of 1993 and 1261 of 1993 were dismissed from service. The said employees challenged their dismissal fr...
Anand Mohan Chhaparwal and Etc. Vs. State and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ597
1. These applications were filed by the accused in Criminal Case No. NC/87/91/D of 1991 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate F.C., Panaji. Criminal Misc. Application No. 272/94 was filed by accused No. 2 and Criminal Misc. Application No. 1/1995 was filed by accused No. 1. The accused No. 1 is the Advertising Agent and accused No. 2 is the manufacturer of the drug.2. The respondent No. 1 had filed a complaint before the J.M.F.C., Panaji under section 200 of Cr.P.C. alleging that certain advertisement appeared in the Navhind Times, English Daily, Panaji on 18th February, 1990 which contained objectionable advertisement punishable under section 7(a) of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisement) Act, 1954 (hereinafter called the Act). The learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the complaint and issued process to the petitioners. On receipt of the process of the Court both the petitioners herein filed application before the learned Magistrate contending inter alia tha...
State of Goa Vs. Pedro Lopes
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ256
1. The State is appellant herein. It challenges the judgment in Criminal Case Number 251/86/B on the file of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Panaji, dated 25th October 1993. 2. The charge against the respondent before the Magistrate was that on 28-7-1986, at about 16 hours, the respondent has committed a criminal trespass into the property of Mr. Tito Menezes under Survey No. 2/3 and and threatened the labourers therein with dire consequences if they did not stop the work. Accordingly, the accused was charged under Sections 506 and 447 of IPC. On the basis of this charge, the trial was proceeded and at the end of the trial the Magistrate found the respondent was not guilty and he was acquitted. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor attacked the judgment on various grounds he has taken me to the evidence and the complaint made before the Magistrate. P.W. 1 admits in his chief examination that property dispute in respect of which offence is alleged to have been committed is going on between...
Sri Giridhar Vithal Kambli Vs. State of Goa
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-1995
Reported in: (1997)99BOMLR64
T.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. Criminal Appeal No. 49 of 1993 is filed by accused No. 1 in Sessions Case No. 1/85 in the District & Sessions Court, South Goa, Margao, and Criminal Appeal No. 50 of 1993 is filed by accused No. 2 in the aforesaid case. Since both these Appeals arise out of a common judgment, I am disposing of these two Appeals by this common judgment.2. The appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 49 of 1993 was working as a Talathi of Record of Rights and the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 50 of 1993 was Assistant of the aforesaid Taiathi. The appellants were charged for offences under Sections 161 and 165 of Indian Penal Code r/w Section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. After trial, the appellants were convicted. They were found guilty for offences under Sections 161 and 165 I.P.C. read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 read with Section 34 I.P.C and they were sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment ...
Ratnakar D. Patade Vs. Smita Pandurang Dalvi and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-02-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Bom69; 1996(1)BomCR206; (1995)97BOMLR369; 1996(1)MhLj76
1. Appeal from Order No. 196 of 1995 is preferred by the original plaintiff from the order passed on 21st December 1994 by Judge Shri P.M.Joshi of the City Civil Court at Bombay on Notice of Motion No. 5954 of 1994 taken out in Suit No. 442 of 1993 pending in the City Civil Court at Bombay. Appeal from Order No. 195 of 1995 is preferred also by the original plaintiff from the order dated 10th February 1995 passed also by Judge Shri P.M.Joshi on Notice of Motion No. 582 of 1995 taken out in the suit. Both these appeals are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The appellant has filed the suit in the City Civil Court at Bombay, inter alia for an order of perpetual injunction against the respondents herein, who are defendants in the suit, restraining them from disturbing the appellant's use, occupation, possession and enjoyment of the suit land, including the building and / or forcibly dispossessing the appellant therefrom as also for an order of permanent injunction restraining the ...
M.V. Palekar Vs. Bank of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-02-1995
Reported in: (1998)IIILLJ681Bom
N.D. Vyas, J.1. By the present petition, the petitioner has challenged the validity and legality of the order dated 19th December, 1992 passed by the Disciplinary Authority and the order dated 7th April, 1993 passed by the Appellate Authority and has prayed that both these orders be quashed and set aside. It is further prayed that the respondents be directed to reinstate the petitioner with full back wages and continuity in service with all other consequential benefits. 2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows :- The petitioner joined services of the Respondent No. 1 in the year 1961 as a direct recruit. He was initially employed as a Sub-Officer and ultimately became Deputy General Manager at the Head Office of the Respondent No. 1 Bank. From 18th October, 1980 to 19th February, 1986 the petitioner was working as a Deputy Zonal Manager/Assistant General Manager of the Bombay Metropolitan Zone. During this period, in respect of one customer of the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »