Mumbai Court July 1996 Judgments
Ganpat Tatyaba Khadtale Vs. Smt. Ushabai Bhimrao Chavan and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-30-1996
Reported in: 1998(1)BomCR595
ORDERD.K. Trivedi, J.1. The petitioner has filed this petition challenging the order passed by the Officer on Special Duty (Appeals and Revision) dated 17th February 1988 in Revision No. BIW-3087/1031/L.5/CR/503 of 1987 (A & R). The disputed land is bearing Survey No. 266/4-C (now gat No. 268) situated at Niphad Dist. Nasik. The said land gat No. 268 is originally class XVI B of Indian land granted to original Watandar under section 23 of the Hereditary Offices Act, 1827 as a remuneration of official or for his services. The said land was granted in favour of late Tatyaba Khandu Khadtale under the said provisions of the Act. The petitioner is the son of the late Tatyaba Khandu challenging the proceedings initiated and the order passed by the Officer on Special Duty in revision filed by the respondent No. 1 herein. The late Tatyaba Khandu on 5th June 1956 under the registered sale deed had sold the suit land to the respondent No. 2 Smt. Shantabai Gangadhar Khadtale for Rs. 300/- on the ...
Tag this Judgment!Baroda Rayon Corporation Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. (Appeals)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-26-1996
Reported in: (1997)(90)ELT90Tri(Mum.)bai
1. All the Appeals (alongwith stay applications) were listed for admission and for granting stay and waiver against recovery.2. After hearing Shri Desai, the ld. Consultant for the appellants, and Shri Krishnamoorthy, the ld. JDR for the department, it appears that the issue involved is of availment of Modvat credit on the documents issued prior to 31-3-1994 in pursuance of entries made in RG 23A Part I, but the credit is taken by entry in RG 23A Part II only on 2-8-1994, whereas, the Notification No. 16/94 provided for taking the credit only upto 30-6-1994. The ld. Consultant has pleaded that Rule 57G does not authorise the Government to specify the dates and that entitled them only to specify the documents. The issue is debatable and hence all the 3 appeals are admitted.3. Considering the arguable issue involved, stay against recovery and waiver of pre-deposit is granted in relation to the duty demanded as well as the penalty amounts....
Tag this Judgment!Machindra Babu Salve Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-26-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ486
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. The appellant aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 27th December, 1982 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur, in Sessions Case No. 89 of 1982, convicting and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302, IPC. has come up in appeal before us. Along with the appellant four others, viz. (1) Gajarabai Uttam Salve, (2) Kamal Machindra Salve, (3) Sojarbai Uttam and (4) Dagadabai Babu Salve were also prosecuted and tried but they have been acquitted vide the impugned judgment. 2. Briefly stated the prosecution case runs as follows : The deceased Rama Savala Salve, his son Harishchandra Rama Salve P.W. 8, his daughter Sharda Ramchandra Salve P.W. 11, and Balu Sakharam Ghadge P.W. 12 were residents of village Pomalwadi, situated within the limits of village and Police Station, Karmala, Dist. Solapur. The appellant and the acquitted accused persons were also residents of the said village. On 26-2-1981 Rama Salve and his son Harishch...
Tag this Judgment!Dhrangadhra Trading Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. S.Y. Vichare and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-26-1996
Reported in: [1996(74)FLR2157]; (1998)IIILLJ863Bom
Tipnis, J.1. This is a motion taken out by the workman praying that the petitioner-Company in writ petition No. 336 of 1996 be directed to pay to the workman every month wages payable to him under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 during the pendency of the aforesaid writ petition. 2. The writ petition No. 336 of 1996 is filed by M/s. Dhrangadhra Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. challenging the legality and validity of the order passed by the learned Presiding Officer, 1st Labour Court, Bombay, i.e., award dated 15th November, 1995 whereunder the workman was directed to be reinstated with full back wages and with continuity of service from 11th August, 1989. The order significantly records that if the Company is closed on any particular day, then the company may follow the procedure as laid down in the Act on that particular day. 3. At the time of admission of the above petition, the division bench passed an order on 20th February, 1996 directing that the respondent will be reinst...
Tag this Judgment!Rainbow Industries Vs. State Government of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-26-1996
Reported in: [1996(74)FLR2249]
Tipnis, J. 1. The petitioner is a partnership firm engaged in the manufacture of L.T. Switch Gears and is carrying on its activities as a small scale industry in a gala situated in Shree Ram Co-op. Society at Goregaon, Mumbai. It is the assertion of the petitioner that the firm is covered under the provisions of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 effective from 1-7-1986. It is the further assertion of the petitioner than till 1st July, 1986 the firm had always engaged less than 10 employees for the purpose of carrying on its manufacturing activities and after it was covered validly as from 1st July, 1986, the firm has made contribution under the Act and the scheme framed thereunder and is also allotted code number under the Act. 2. It appears that Inspectress of the E.S.I. Corporation visited the premises on 14-10-1983 and made certain report. The Regional Director of ESI Corporation held that the company was covered under the provisions of the Act from 14-10-1983 by his order dat...
Tag this Judgment!Yashodabai Ganpat Wani Since Decd. by Heirs and Legal Representatives ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-26-1996
Reported in: 1997(3)BomCR23
R.G. Deshpande, J.1. The only question that needs consideration in the present petition is as to whether the respondent-tenant could be said to be ready and willing to pay the standard rent and further as to whether could he be branded as a defaulter liable to be evicted from the premises in question and whether the learned District Judge, Jalgaon committed an error in reaching to the conclusion that the respondent-tenant had substantially complied with the provisions of section 12(3)(b) of the Bombay Rent Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bombay Rent Act' for the purposes of brevity).2. The facts of the case in nutshell are, one Ramnarayan Govindram Sarswat happened to be the tenant of the petitioner-landlord Yashodabai and Prabhawati. Since Yashodabai died during the pendency of the petition, her legal representatives namely, Chandrakant and others, are brought on record. The original tenant Ramnarayan Govindram Sarswat, also has expired...
Tag this Judgment!Jankibai Balwant Rajhans Since Deceased by Her Legal Heirs Vs. Suryabh ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-26-1996
Reported in: 1997(3)BomCR543
R.G. Deshpande, J.1. The land Survey No. 600 situated at village Sonai (Taluka : Newasa, District : Ahmednagar), having area of 5 Hectares .05 Ares is the subject matter of the present petition. The said land is ordered to be restored to the respondent No. 1 - tenant by the Tahsildar, Newasa, by his judgment and order dated 23rd November 1977 vide Tenancy Case No. 8/77 which is confirmed by the Assistant Collector, Rahuri Division, Ahmednagar, in Tenancy Appeal No. 1/78 and Tenancy Appeal No. 4/78, decided on 31st March 1979.2. In nutshell the facts are. Proceedings were initiated on receipt of application of tenant Suryabhan - respondent No. 1, under section 37 of the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act' for the purposes of brevity). After issuance of necessary notices to the parties concerned, statements of both the parties i.e. of the petitioner and the respondent - tenant were recorded and necessary witnesses also have been examined. ...
Tag this Judgment!The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs. thermal Engineering Co ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-25-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)BomCR353; 1997(1)MhLj700
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 12th December, 1994 of the learned single Judge dismissing the Arbitration Petition No. 127 of 1991 filed by the appellants. 2. The material facts of the case, briefly stated, are as follow : In the year 1978, tenders were invited by the appellants, the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay ('Corporation'), for installing the crematorium furnaces in Bombay. In pursuance's of the above tender invitation, tender has submitted by the respondent No. 1, Thermal Engineering Corporation, on 1st February 1979. The Corporation accepted the said tender and issued the work order on 2nd November 1979. As per the work order, respondent No. 1 was required to complete the construction of two crematorium furnaces within 11 months. The respondent No. 1, however, could not start the work because of the strike resorted to by the sand suppliers, which continued till October 1980. During this interregnum, the prices of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Ravindra Anant Deshmukh Vs. City and Industrial Development Corporatio ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-24-1996
Reported in: AIR1997Bom284; 1997(1)BomCR274; 1996(2)MhLj847
ORDERDr. B. P. Saraf, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned single Judge dated 8th June, 1993 dismissing the suit of the appellant field under Section 20 of the Arbtiration Act, 1940 ('Arbitration Act') and thereby refusing to refer the dispute arising out of a contract between appellant and the respondent to arbitration. 2. The material facts of the case, briefly stated, are as follows: The appellant, who caries on the business of building contractors and developers in the name and style of 'United Precast Products', entered into an agreement with the respondent, City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Limited CIDCO), for construction of 14 buildings comprising of 168 tenements at Nerul Road, New Bombay. The contract contained an arbitration clause which proved for reference of doubts, disputes and differences arising between the parties to arbitration. The said clause reads:'83. Arbitration : Except where otherwise specified in ...
Tag this Judgment!Radhika Lining Limited Vs. Economic Development Corporation
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-24-1996
Reported in: 1997(3)ALLMR308; 1998(2)BomCR190; (1996)98BOMLR891
ORDERR.K. Batta, J.1. The appellants (plaintiffs in the suit) had taken loan from E.D.C., namely, respondent (defendant in the suit). The respondent recalled the said loan vide Notice dated 7-11-1994 issued under section 30 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951. The appellants filed a Suit in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panaji seeking various reliefs including declaration that the said Notice dated 7-11-1994 recalling the loan and seeking re-payment of Rs.90,81,358/- be declared illegal, null and void and contrary to the terms of mortgage and/or agreements of finance. The appellants also claimed a sum of Rs.1,59,79,138-62 with 18% interest thereon due to losses and damages suffered by them on account of non-disbursement of balance loan of Rs.13,00,000/- and subsidy of Rs.25,00,000/-. The other relief sought was restraint on the respondent form objecting to transfer of mortgage, transfer of right, title and interest in the assets as well as from making public issu...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »