Mumbai Court February 1996 Judgments
Shri Savio O. Fernandes and Another Vs. State Election Commissioner an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-22-1996
Reported in: AIR1996Bom343; (1996)98BOMLR534
ORDERShah, J.1. These four writ petitions relate to the election of Panaji Municipal Council. They involve a common question. They have been heard together and shall be disposed of by this common judgment.2. On December 20, 1995, the State Election Commissioner of Goa issued an order under Section 11 of the Goa Municipalities Act (for short 'the Act') and notified thereby that the electoral roll of the Goa Legislative Assembly prepared under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and for the time being in force, as on that day, of December 20, 1995, for such constituency of the Assembly or any part thereof as is included in the municipal area, shall be divided and authenticated by Mamlatdar of Tiswadi taluka in which Panaji Municipal Council is situated into different sections corresponding to the different wards in the municipal area as fixed under Section 10 of the Act.The State Election Commissioner on December 29, 1995 published the calendar of events of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Cable Corporation of India Ltd. Bombay Vs. Dilip Pandurang Padhye and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-22-1996
Reported in: [1996(73)FLR1073]
ORDERMajithia, J.1. On the petition of respondent No. 1, Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Conciliation), Bombay, referred the following dispute for adjudication to the Labour Court : 'Whether the workman is entitled for reinstatement with full back wages and continuity of service with effect from March 7, 1985'?. 2. The 1st Labour Court, passed the following Award on August 18, 1995 : 'The Company to reinstate the workman with continuity of service with effect from 6/7 February 1985 with 50% back wages and other consequential benefits'. 3. The Petitioner-Management has challenged this award in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The writ petition came up for hearing on January 9, 1996 and the following order was passed : 'Rule. Operation of the impugned order stayed subject to compliance of Section 17B of Industrial Disputes Act. Back wages be deposited in Fixed Deposit in any Scheduled Bank for period of three years within one month. If the petition is not disposed of i...
Tag this Judgment!Association of Chemical Workers Vs. S.D. Rane and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-22-1996
Reported in: 1996(4)BomCR37; (1997)ILLJ61Bom
1. This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court made on September 7, 1983 in W.P. No. 3038 of 1993. The appellant is a rival trade Union under M/s Chemicals & Fibres of India Ltd. (formerly ICI India Ltd).The Industrial Court in the order had pointed out that the total employees as on June 15, 1981 were 811 and the respondent- union has a strength of 448 as against theappellant-rival union having strength of 241. Thus it was held to be a recognized union. The appellant had challenged the procedure adopted by the Investigating Officer under Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union, and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (1 of 1971)(for short, 'MRTUPULP Act') 2. Shri Kailash Vasdev learned Counsel forthe appellant, contended that the investigating Officer was not justified in law conducting spot verification and calling employees either by alternate number and verifying the same and that the procedure, therefore, was clearly...
Tag this Judgment!Richardson and Cruddas (1972) Ltd. Vs. Association of Engineering Work ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-20-1996
Reported in: 1996(5)BomCR664; [1996(73)FLR1582]; (1998)IIILLJ54Bom; 1996(1)MhLj1005
1. These two petitions are disposed of by this judgment as common questions of law and facts arise for determination therein. 2. Ronald P. Franks, hereinafter 'the workman' is a national player in football. He was employed as a coolie by M/s. Richardson & Cruddas (1972) Ltd. (petitioners in writ petition No. 1167 of 1995), hereinafter 'the employer'. The employee was a bit irregular in attending his duties and was habitually a latecomer. The employer by letter dated November 28, 1984 charge-sheeted him on the allegations of habitual absenteeism. The workman's advocate replied to the charge-sheet by letter dated November 30, 1984. In the reply he stated that he deliberately did not commit breach of any rules and regulations of the company applicable to him and prayed for dropping of the charge-sheet against him. The employer was not satisfied with the reply of the workman. A domestic inquiry was ordered. The employee pleaded guilty before the inquiry Officer. The Inquiry Officer, after ...
Tag this Judgment!Sudha Sakharam Govandalkar and ors. Vs. Shrikrishna Pandurang Kode D/H ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-20-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)BomCR83; (1996)98BOMLR154
B.P. Saraf, J.1. The writ petitioners are in occupation of certain premises owned by the respondents (original applicants). The respondents filed an ejectment application before the Court of Small Cause at Bombay under section 41 of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, 1882 for recovery of possession of the same from the petitioners. The said application, which was filed in the year 1974, was numbered as Ejectment Application 262-E of 1974. On receipt of notice of the said application, the petitioners appeared before the Small Cause Court and filed their reply claiming, inter alia, that they were tenants of the applicants within the meaning of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (Bombay Act LVII of 1947) and in consequences thereof entitled to the protection of that Act. 2. After the issues were framed by the Court, the original applicants (respondents herein) filed an application on 5th October, 1984 praying for framing of a preliminary issue to decide ...
Tag this Judgment!Sudha Sakharam Govandalkar and ors. Vs. Shrikrishna Pandurang Kode and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-20-1996
Reported in: 1996(4)BomCR380
B.P. Saraf, J.1. The writ petitioners are in occupation of certain premises owned by the respondents (original applicants). The respondents filed an ejectment application before the Court of Small Cause at Bombay under section 41 of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, 1882 for recovery of possession of the same from the petitioners. The said application, which was filed in the year 1974, was numbered as Ejectment Application 262-E of 1974. On receipt of notice of the said application, the petitioners appeared before the Small Cause Court and filed their reply claiming, inter alia, that they were tenants of the applicants within the meaning of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (Bombay Act LVII of 1947) and in consequences thereof entitled to the protection of that Act.2. After the issues were framed by the Court, the original applicants (respondents herein) filed an application on 5th October, 1984 praying for framing of a preliminary issue to decide t...
Tag this Judgment!Vadilal Dairy International Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-19-1996
Reported in: (1997)(68)LC462Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Appellant imported in 1994 six reconditioned used machines from West Germany for use in the Dairy Project of the appellant under four Bs/E.The import documents included certificates of Chartered Engineers of West Germany. The Assistant Collector did not accept the transaction value in regard to these six machines and determined the value by the depreciation method, relying on the long standing Custom House practice and certain letters of Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue. The Collector (Appeals) sustained the order. Hence this appeal by the importer.2. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that neither the original authority nor the appellant authority applied their minds to the acceptability or otherwise of the transaction value of six machines but proceeded arbitrarily to determine the value under Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988, feeling bound to do so by a misreading of the letters of the Ministry. Counsel further contended that the two authorities did not...
Tag this Judgment!Li Taka Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Other
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-19-1996
Reported in: AIR1997Bom7; 1996(4)BomCR100; [1998]91CompCas871(Bom)
Shah, C.J.1. In this group of petitions, the petitioners have prayed that section 2(g)(iv) read with article 25 of Schedule I to the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958, be declared unconstitutional, ultra vires the Constitution of India and null and void. It is also prayed that the respondents be restrained from requiring the petitioners to pay stamp duty on the amalgamation orders passed by this court or from taking any steps against the petitioners under the provisions of the Bombay Stamp Act. 2. At the time of admission of the petitions, this court had granted interim relief by taking the usual undertakings that in the event this court directs the petitioners, the petitioners shall pay the entire amount of stamp duty assessed without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioners. 3. For appreciating the contentions of the petitioners, it would be necessary to refer to section 2(g). Section 2(g). Section 2(g) reads as under : '(g) 'conveyance' includes, - (i) a conveyance on sale, ...
Tag this Judgment!Satish S/O Narayan Ate Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-19-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ935
1. The appellant-accused has challenged herein his conviction for the offence under S. 306 of the IPC. 2. The prosecution case is that one Maya, who was a resident of village Rohana in Wardha district was in love with the appellant-accused and their love affair was going on for about one-and-a-half years. That, the parents of Maya agreed for the marriage between Maya and the accused. The accused also agreed for the same and it was decided that the marriage was to be performed on 18-6-1989. However, the accused did not come and avoided to get married. It has further come in the prosecution evidence that on 24-6-1989, Maya filed a report at Exhibit 42 with the Police Station alleging therein that though her marriage was fixed with the accused and though the clothes etc. were stitched, the accused had not married her as his mother Gangabai had demanded Rs. 5000/- from her as a pre-condition for her marriage with the accused and as a result of that, the accused was searching for other girl...
Tag this Judgment!Girdharilal Warialdas Mangtani Dead Through L.Rs Vs. Mohd. Younus S/O ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-19-1996
Reported in: 1996(4)BomCR150; (1996)98BOMLR214
R.M. Lodha, J.1. By this writ petition, challenge is made to the order passed by the Appellate Authority, Rent Controller, Nagpur, on 4-6-1989 whereby the Appellate Authority set aside the order passed by the Rent Controller on 16-11-1988 in Revenue Case No. 92/A-71(2)/83-84 and sent the matter back to the Rent Controller for deciding the application filed by the petitioner under C.P. & Berar, Letting of Premises and Rent Control, Order, 1949.2. Girdharilal Mangtani since deceased now represented by his legal representatives (for short, the 'original landlord') made an application before the Rent Controller, Nagpur, seeking permission to terminate the tenancy under Clause 13(3)(ii), (iii) and (iv) of C.P. & Berar Letting of Premises and Rent Control Order, 1949 (for short, 'the Rent Control Order). The said application was filed against two non-applicants, namely Mohd. Younus and Upasrao Chichghare Dalal. It is averred that non-applicant No. 1 was the tenant in respect of the disputed ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »