Mumbai Court February 1996 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.
Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Hospital Vs. Madbukar Vishwanath Ranawade and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-12-1996
Reported in: 1996(3)BomCR707; [1996(73)FLR1586]; (1997)ILLJ583Bom; 1996(1)MhLj762
G.R. Majithia, J.1. Rule, with the consent of the parties' counsel, rule is made returnable forthwith. Learned counsel for respondent No. 1 waives service. The petitioner, Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Hospital, has challenged the order of the Industrial Court, Bombay, dated November 17, 1993 on the interim relief application, Ex U-2, in Complaint (ULP) No. 1177 of 1995, in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. Respondent No. 1, Madbukar Vishwanath Ranawade, (hereinafter 'the respondent'), joined the service of the petitioner as a Clerk from March, 1962. Later on he worked as a Cashier too. In September, 1966 he was promoted to the post of Head Clerk. He worked in the various departments of the petitioner-hospital and was asked to assist the superiors like Administrative Officer, Accounts Officer, Secretary, Board of Management. He was designated as Junior Administrative Officer in December, 1974. The respondent was informed by retirement memo dated August 11,...
Sureshprasad Madhavprasad Shukla Vs. Divisional Controller, Msrtc.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-12-1996
Reported in: 1996(5)BomCR553; (1997)IIILLJ816Bom; 1997(2)MhLj292
1. Taking exception to the order passed by the Industrial Court on September 19, 1989, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. The essential facts for disposal of the writ petition are that the petitioner Sureshprasad Madhavprasad Shukla was initially appointed on daily wages as conductor in the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (for short, the 'employer') and later on with effect from December 29, 1964, the petitioner was regularised on the post of conductor. After about 8 years of service, from April 1973, the petitioner was assigned the job of Traffic Controller and was paid wages as Controller. In the year 1977, the petitioner filed a complaint under Section 28 read with Items 4 (d) and (e) of Schedule-II and Items 5, 6 and 7 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions And Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, (for short, the 'Act of 1971') seeking regularisation on the post ...
Shri Damodar Ramnath Alve Vs. Shri Gokuldas Ramnath Alve and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-12-1996
Reported in: 1997(4)BomCR653
B.U. Wahane, J.1. The appeal from order is directed against the order passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Margao on 30th April 1992 in an Inventory Proceedings No. 18910/75/A. By the impugned order the trial Court has revoked its order granting five days time to the appellant Shri Damodar Ramnath Alve to deposit the owelty money, cancelled earlier auction and has ordered a fresh auction to be held in respect of assets taken on auction by the appellant Shri Damodar. 2. The Inventory Proceedings not being akin to the provisions of other enactments, except in the territory of Goa, Shri Usgaonkar, the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, has apprised this Court with the Portuguese Civil Procedure Code. Articles 1369 to 1447, under Chapter XVII, deal with Inventory Proceedings. Inventory proceedings are like that of succession. It deals with the succession, partition among the legal heirs. In the partition, if the parties are not given equal shares, under those circumstances to...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Andhra Valley Power Supply Co.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1996
Reported in: (1998)66ITD600(Mum.)
1. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-II, Mumbai, vide there applications under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act') has requested the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter called "the Tribunal") to refer the following identical questions, said to be questions of law, arising out of the consolidated order of the Tribunal dated 18th May, 1995, to the Hon'ble High Court for its esteemed opinion. 1. "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Tribunal was right in law in holing that the case of the assessee is governed by the pre-amended section 263 which put an interdict on the powers of CIT to revise the order of re-assessment made under section 147 when the order under section 263 was passed on 26-3-1993 and the Act was amended w.e.f. 1-10-1984 ?" 2. "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ITAT was right in law in holding that the conditions precedent for assuming the jurisdiction under section...
Sopan Maruti Thopte and Another Etc. Etc. Vs. Pune Municipal Corporati ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1996
Reported in: AIR1996Bom304
ORDERM. B. SHAH, C. J.1. Heard the learnedCounsel for the parties. 2. This group of Writ Petitions, has been referred to Division Bench by A. P. Shah, J. by order dated 11th October, 1995. In referring order it is observed that these matters are required to be decided with some priority because the Courts are virtually flooded with the demolition matters and there are conflicting views expressed by this Court in various decisions mentioned therein. It was also observed that unauthorized structures are mushrooming in this city every day and, therefore, it was stated that the matters may be decided with some priority. 3. Similarly, in Appeal from Order No. 477 of 1994, S. N. Variava, J. has also referred the matter to the Division Bench by observing that following question of law be decided by the Division Bench. 'Whether in the very Scheme of the provisions of Section 351 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, it is obligatory on the Deputy Municipal Commissioner to give a personal or...
Bhoruka Steel Ltd. Vs. Fairgrowth Financial Services Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1996
Reported in: [1997]89CompCas547(Bom)
S.N. Variava J.1. By this application the applicants seek stay of further proceedings in Case No. 15 of 1995 and Miscellaneous Application No. 145 of 1995 and Miscellaneous Application No. 6 of 1996. 2. Mr. Hegde seeks to intervene in this application. He submits that against his client there is a pending petition, being Miscellaneous Petition No. 57 of 1995. He submits that an identical question of law is involved. He submits that on the question of law involved he should also be heard, as otherwise this judgment will affect him. On the question of law Mr. Hegde has been allowed to intervene and argue. The question of law involved is whether the provisions of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, 'the Sick Companies Act' prevail over the provisions of the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992 ('the said Act'). The facts set out hereinafter do not apply to Mr. Hegde's client and are restricted only to this application...
Wealth-tax Officer Vs. A. A. Heptulla
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-08-1996
Reported in: (1982)1ITD28(Mum.)
1. These appeals by the department relate to the assessment years 1971-72, 1972-73, 1973-74, 1974-75 and 1975-76. The relevant valuation dates were samvat years 2026 to 2030, respectively.2. The only ground taken by the department which is common to all the appeals is that the AAC erred in holding that the mahr amount said to have been agreed to be paid at the time of marriage and later increased by an entry dated 10-6-1974 in the Nikahnama is a debt owed by the assessee and directing the WTO to deduct the same from the assessee's total net wealth.3. Before the WTO, the assessee had claimed deduction of Rs. 2 lakhs being the mahr amount due from the assessee to his wife, as a liability while computing the taxable wealth. The assessee and his wife were married on 7-12-1966. An agreement executed between the assessee and his wife dated 21-12-1966 shows that at the time of marriage a prompt mahr of Rs. 1 lakh was fixed as consideration for the marriage and that the mahr was increased fro...
Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs. M/S. Ghanekar Construction ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-08-1996
Reported in: 1996(3)BomCR697; (1996)98BOMLR325
ORDERS.M. Jhunjunuwala, J. 1. By this petition, the petitioners seek to have the Award dated 7th December, 1989 filed in this court and numbered as 'Award No. 27 of 1990' set aside. 2. The petitioners are the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay, a body Corporate established under The Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888. The respondents are a private limited company duly incorporated and registered under the provisions of The Companies Act, 1956. The respondents carry on business at Bombay. 3. The petitioners had invited tenders for 'Providing and laying 700 mm dia. C.I. Rising mains from Banganga pumping Station along the Bhagwanlal Indrajit Road with the proposed balancing Chamber along Keshavrao Khadye Marg, Bombay' (for short, 'the said work'). The tender of the respondents for the said work was accepted and contract was entered into by and between the petitioners and the respondents in respect of the said work. In 24th October, 1980, a formal contract agreement was entered i...
Hamidkhan Vs. State of Maharashtra, Through P.S. Dhantoli, Nagpur
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-08-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)BomCR179; 1997BomCR(Cri)235; 1996CriLJ2722; 1996(2)MhLj258
Ghodeswar, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 6-7-91 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Sessions Case No. 44/91 convicting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 21 of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for 10 years and pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- in default further R.I. for one year. 2. Shortly stated the facts of the case are that P.W. 8 Nathu Damaji, Head Constable of Dhantoli police station received information that one person is possessing 'Gard' near Dhantoli Gymkhana Ground. He took entry of the same in Police Station Diary; informed Asstt. Commissioner of Police; collected two panchas for raid. P.W. 9 P.S.I. Shankar Sitikar was directed by the A.C.P. to accompany the raiding party. P.W. 9 also took station diary entry in Police chowki Dhantoli at Serial Nos. 16 Exh. 32 and 17-Exh. 33. When the raiding party reached Gymkhana Ground, they saw accused sitting on a cart, whic...
Maruti Ganpat Jadhav and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-07-1996
Reported in: AIR1996Bom214; 1996(3)BomCR298; (1996)98BOMLR254; 1996(1)MhLj827
ORDERA. P. Shah, J. 1. The short question which falls for our consideration in this petition under Art. 226 is whether the acquisition proceedings of the petitioners' lands lapsed in view of Section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ('the Act', for short).2. The relevant facts lie within a narrow compass. The petitioners are the owners of gat Nos. 69/2 and 95/2 situate at village Hivare, Taluka Junnar, District Pune. The Government of Maharashtra issued notification under Section 4 of the Act declaring its intention to acquire an area of 55 acres out of gat Nos. 69/2 and 1 hectare and 8 acres out of gat No. 95/2 for the purpose of resettlement of persons displaced by Kukadi project in Pune district. After considering the objections raised by the petitioners in enquiry under Section 5A of the Act, notification under Section 6 was published in the Government gazette on 18th July, 1987. The notification was published in the local news papers some time in October, 1987 and the parties ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »