Mumbai Court January 1997 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.
Anand Swaroop Ram Kumar Gupta Vs. the Union of India Through the Secre ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1997
Reported in: 1998BomCR(Cri)321
ORDERA.V. Savant, J. 1. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties, the application for amendment dated 16th January 1997 is granted. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. By consent, heard all the Counsel on all the contentions including the contentions raised by way of amendment. 2. This petition is by the brother of the detenu Ram Avtar Gupta challenging the order at Exhibit 'A' dated 4th March 1996 issued by the 2nd respondent-Shri K.L Verma, Joint Secretary to the Government of India who was specially empowered under section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short 'COFEPOSA Act'). Under the said order dated 4th March 1996 the detenu has been ordered to be detained for a period of one year with a view to preventing him from smuggling goods and also from abetting smuggling of goods in future. A few relevant facts necessary for the purpose of this judgment may be stated. 3. Intelligence was received by the office...
Mrs. Carolina Fernandes Vs. Smt. Aida Sequeira E. Vaz and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1997
Reported in: (1997)99BOMLR279
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. The present petition is preferred against the order dated 29th March, 1993 passed by the Additional Rent Controller, Mormugao in Case No. BLDG/ MISC/1/93. By the said order the respondent No. 3 herein has stayed the order of eviction passed in Case No. BLDG/ARC-VS2/92 dated 25th February, 1993 and the matter was fixed for hearing pursuant to the application filed by the respondent No. 2 herein under Section 50 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 hereinafter called as 'the Rent Act', read with Order XXI Rules 99, 100 and 101 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. It is noticed from the records that, inspite of repeated opportunity being afforded to the petitioner, no steps were taken to serve respondent No.) and, therefore, the matter as far as the respondent No. 1 is concerned, was ordered to be dismissed.3. The facts of the case in brief is that the petitioner is the owner of the building known as 'Carolin Niketan' and ...
Linde A. G. Vs. Income Tax Officer. (Also Ito V. Linde A. G.).
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1997
Reported in: (1997)59TTJ(Mumbai)169
ORDERR. P. GARG, A.M. :These six cross-appeals - three by the assessee and three by the Revenue, are against the orders of the CIT(A) for asst. yrs. 1984-85, 1985-86 and 1986-87. Since they involve common disputes, they are disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. The first dispute in all these appeals is as to what is the nature of receipt by the assessee from the Indian concern in pursuance of the agreements dt. 25th March, 1976, commonly known as Supply & Engineering Agreement; 10th May, 1977, known as Ammonia Service Agreement; 12th March, 1984, known as Methanol Service Agreement; and 30th September, 1977 known as Methanol Contract, for supply of design and technical consultancy. Under the agreement dt. 25th March, 1976, the assessee purchased bulk material and spares required for setting up of a fertiliser plant in the State of Gujarat. These purchases were charged from the Indian concern, i.e. Gujarat State Fertilisers Company at cost plus 4 per cent procu...
Girjaram Halnor Vs. Aurangabad Municipal Corporation Through Its Commi ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-22-1997
Reported in: AIR1998Bom101; 1998(1)BomCR112
ORDERR.G. Deshpande, J.1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.2. The petitioner herein, Chairman of the Standing Committee of the Aurangabad Municipal Corporation, made a grievance about the certain directions of the Deputy Commissioner, Municipal Corporation in pursuance of the directions of the State Election Commission. The elections of the Zilla Parishads in the State are in process and by letter dated 15-1-1997 the Town Secretary, Aurangabad informed the petitioner that since the Code of Conduct is in operation, no policy decisions can be taken in the meetings of the Municipal Corporation. Therefore, though a meeting can be called, there can be no discussion in the meeting and no policy decision can be taken. It is also pointed out in the petition that the vehicles belonging to the Corporation and used by various officers and non-official office bearers have been withdrawn and it is prayed that they should be allowed to make use of them.3. Article 243-K of the Constitution of Ind...
Maharashtra State Electricity Board Vs. Arvind Purushottam Joshi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-22-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Bom160; 1997(3)BomCR413; (1997)2BOMLR40; 1997(2)MhLj59
1. The susbstantial questionofd law framed at the time of admission of this second appeal and that needs answer is: Whether the use of energy by the respondent in his hotel is for the purpose of Industrial Use or Commercial Use under the tariff issued by the appellant under the provisions of Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948?2. The aforesaid substaintial question of law arises in the facts and circumstances briefly narated hereunder: The respondent herein Shri Arvind P. Joshi (for short, `consumer') is the sole propritor of Hotel Raviraj situated at 865, Shivajinagar, Pune. He applied to the Maharashtra State Electricity Board, appellant herein (for short, 'the Board') for supply of 49.78 KW of electrical energy for commercial purposes particularly for the use of deep freezers, freezers, oven, mixer, grinder, water-heater, air-conditioners, water-coolers and like. The officials of the Board inspected the site and submitted the testing report on 13-5-1978 and sanction was granted to the co...
Cedric X. Pinheiro Vs. Smt. Josefina Remedios and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-22-1997
Reported in: [1998]91CompCas99(Bom)
R.K. Batta, J.1. The entire dispute in this appeal centres round fixed deposit receipt No. 208 of 1975, for Rs. 20,000, which was subsequently renewed as Fixed Deposit Receipt No. 244 of 1986, and a sum of Rs. 20,616.07 lying in Savings Bank Account No. 2245 (later on changed to 12164 in the name of respondent No. 1). Fixed Deposit Receipt No. 208 of 1975 (now 244 of 1986, in the name of respondent No. 1) was payable to either or survivor, namely, Fr. Damaso D'Lima, and the original plaintiff, Claire Victoria Pinheiro. The savings bank account was also in their names and was also payable to either or survivor. The original Savings Bank Account No. 2245 was opened somewhere on February 2, 1972, and the Fixed Deposit Receipt No. 208 of 1975, is of the year 1975. On October 16, 1974, Fr. Damaso D'Lima executed a will in favour of respondent No. 1 and the material portion of the will which is relevant for the purpose of the decision of this appeal is as under : 'And in the presence of the ...
Entrenonde Polycoaters Ltd. Vs. Kamgar Sabha, Thane and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-22-1997
Reported in: [1997(75)FLR681]; (1997)IILLJ291Bom
Ashok Agarwal, J. 1. Rule. By consent Rule is made returnable forthwith. 2. Respondent No. 1 moved an application for transfer of the proceedings from the Court of Shri Akolkar, Judge of the Industrial Court, Nasik making the allegations of bias against him. The President of the Industrial Court by the impugned order passed on August 20, 1996 has found that the allegations were not justified. Despite these findings, he has proceeded to pass an order of transfer of the proceedings to the Court of Shri J. P. Limaye, Member of the Industrial Court, Thane. This order he has styled as an administrative order of transfer. In our view, the impugned order of transfer is wholly unjustified and the same could not have been passed in the teeth of his finding that the allegations of bias were wholly unjustified. 3. The impugned order, in the circumstances, is set aside. Rule is made absolute. Shri Akolkar, who have no doubt, will conduct the proceedings dispassionately and without being affected b...
Time Pharma Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-21-1997
Reported in: (1998)(99)ELT643Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai, in the impugned order has disposed of two appeals relating to the classification of the product 'Moisturex' and the demand for duty based on that classification. The appellants filed classification lists from time to time classifying the product under Heading 30.03 Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (CETA) as medicament. But the jurisdictional Asstt.Commissioner of Central Excise did not accept that it was so classifiable and passed an order holding that the product is classifiable as a cosmetic product being a preparation for the care of the skin under Heading 33.04. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the classification by the Assistant Commissioner and found that the ingredients in the product like urea have uses other than for medicinal purposes as per the condensed chemical Dictionary by Gestener G.Hawley; that even according to one of the documents submitted by the appellants "Uses of urea is cosmetology" use of urea in cosmeti...
Capt. Jens Warner Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Prev.)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-21-1997
Reported in: (1998)(99)ELT324Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These two applications have been filed along with the appeals against the common order captioned above passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Prev.), Mumbai. The application from Capt. Jens Warner, Master of the Vessel M.V. Wilma, is for dispensing with the pre-deposit of a penalty of Rs. 25,00,000/- imposed on him under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 and for stay of its recovery. Applicant Carl F.Peters (GMBH & CO.), the owners of the vessel is for staying the operation of the impugned order and to hear the appeal without prior deposit of fine of Rs. 1 crore in lieu of confiscation of the vessel levied in the impugned order, under Section 115(2) of Customs Act, 1962.2. Ld. Counsels S/Shri Mukherjee and Wadwalkar of M/s. Bhat & Saldanha appearing for the applicants submitted that the penalty on applicant Capt. Jens Warner is based on no evidence but on mere inferential findings of the Commissioner that the non-maintenance of verification log relating visitors to the v...
Malla Rama Khot (Deceased by Lr) and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-21-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Bom166; 1997(3)BomCR412
ORDERDr. (Mrs.) Upasani, J. 1. By this writ petition the petitioners are challenging the acquisition the petitioners are challenging the acquisition of land bearing Gat No.215, admeasuring 48 Areas and Gat No. 244, Admeasuring 72 Areas, notified for the purposes of resettlement of Dudhganga Project affected persons. 2. It is the contention of the petitioners that the deceased original petitioner No. 1 Malla Rama Khot, sold out the land Gat No. 97 admeasuring 1 H.12 Ares under a Registered Sale Deed to one Gopal Beedkar on 22nd June, 1976, prior to Notification under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Resettlement of Project Displaced Persons Act, 1976 and, therefore, the said land has to be excluded from their holdings. 3. The second contention of the petitioners is that the land Gat No. 245 admeasuring 1 H. 22 Ares is belonging to one Vasudeo Haripur Devasthan Trust and therefore, the said land also cannot form part of the petitioner's holdings. 4. Under the circumstances, it is played by ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »