Mumbai Court November 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.
The Mapusa Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd. and Another Vs. Shri G.S. Pati ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-07-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALLMR761; 1998(4)BomCR100
ORDERT.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. This writ petition has been filed praying, inter alia, for a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order calling for the records relating to the Judgement and Order of the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, North Zone, bearing No. 1/48/65-RES/(C)-193/Goa/ARNZ/Vol. V dated 8th January, 1993, and quashing the same as also for a declaration that Mapusa Urban Co-operative Bank Limited became a deemed Multi-State Co-operative Society registered under the corresponding provisions of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 1984 (hereinafter called 'the Central Act'). The first petitioner is the Mapusa Urban Co-operative Bank Limited and the second petitioner is the Chairman of the Mapusa Urban Co-operative Bank Limited. Facts leading to the writ petition are as follows.2. The first respondent, Shri G.S. Patil, the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, North Zone, Mapusa, Goa, had issued a notic...
Shri Bhaguji Bayaji Pokale and Others Vs. Shri Kantilal Baban Gunjawat ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-06-1997
Reported in: AIR1998Bom114; 1998(1)ALLMR536; 1998(3)BomCR5; 1998(1)MhLj276
ORDERS. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The brief facts leading to this second appeal are as under: In the year 1951, that is to say on 26th September, 1951, the appellants herein who were the original defendant Nos. 1 and 2, had purchased from the respondents, two acres of land from Survey No. 32/1 and had also purchased a share of 2 annas and 8 pie in a Rupee with regard to a well situated at Survey No. 32/3 for a total sum of Rs. 700/-. This sale deed was duly registered. There is absolutely no dispute between the parties with regard to this sale deed. The respondents herein also do not dispute the appellants title with regard to the two acres of land which is found in Survey No. 32/1. The only dispute is with regard to 2 annas and 8 pie share in the entire well which is situated at Survey No. 32/2. It appears that the respondents, without any notice whatsoever to the appellants, got the mutation entry changed with regard to the appellants right, title etc., regarding the aforesaid well. Only i...
A-one Cement Concrete Works Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-06-1997
Reported in: 1998(3)ALLMR193; 1998(4)BomCR163
D.K. Deshmukh, J. 1. By this petition the petitioner challenges the order dated 17.11.1992 passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Pune under Section 7-A of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, holding that the provisions of the Act are applicable to M/s. Ellora Stone Co., M/s. Royal Marble and M/s. A-One Cement Concrete Works w.e.f. 30.4.1986. 2. The principal grievance of the petitioner M/s. A-One Cement Concrete Works is that before making the order, the respondent Regional Provident Fund Commissioner did not issue any notice to the petitioner. In the petition a categorical statement has been made that a finding has been recorded by the respondent that the petitioner A-One Cement Concrete Works, M/s. Ellora Stone Co., and M/s. Royal Marble is one unit for the purpose of the Act, without issuing notice to the petitioner and without giving him an opportunity of being heard. Perusal of the order shows that in the order the respondent has no ...
East India Cotton Association Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-05-1997
Reported in: (1998)(74)LC440Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The above appeal arises out of the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay upholding the order of the Assistant Collector who has confirmed the demand of differential duty of Rs. 30,846.50 p on two air conditioners received by the appellants under the provisions of Chapter X of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Since the appellants sought for a decision on merits, we have heard the learned DR Shri Usman and perused the records.2... Appellants were granted permission to bring two units of Split System Package Type Air conditioners of 5 tonnes capacity each at concessional rate of duty in terms of Notification No. 56/78 dated 1.3.1978 as amended by Notification No. 25/79 dated 1.3.1979 for use in their Cotton Testing and Research Laboratory. The said two units were cleared under cover of Gate pass dated 13.5.1980 and corresponding AR No. 3 and were received by the appellants on 16.5.1980. Since the appellants failed to install and commission the air conditioners with...
Entermode Polycoaters Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-05-1997
Reported in: (1998)(74)LC447Tri(Mum.)bai
1. In this appeal filed by M/s Entermode Polycoaters (P) Ltd., the matter relates to the eligibility of the goods in question to the benefit of Not. No. 250/77-CE dated 23.7.1977 as amended. This exemption Notification provided the exemption to the fire resistant products falling u/s. h. No. 5903.99 or 5906.90 of the Schedule to the CETA, 1985 (referred to as the Tariff). There is no dispute that the goods in question were classifiable u/s.h. No. 5903.99 of the Tariff.The benefit of the exemption Notification had however been denied on the ground that the appellants had not produced any concrete evidence to indicate that the impugned products were fire resistant one and were so used.2. We have heard Shri. R. Swaminathan, Advocate for the appellants and Shri Satnam Singh, SDR for the respondent Revenue.3. We have gone through the impugned order-in-appeal and find that the Appellate Authority had summarised the main grounds of the appeal in para 2 of his order. Their submissions made du...
Shivprasad Shankarlal Pardeshi, Since Deceased by His Heirs Vs. Leelab ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-05-1997
Reported in: AIR1998Bom131; 1998(1)ALLMR393; 1998(2)BomCR744; (1998)1BOMLR822; 1998(1)MhLj444
ORDERArvind V. Savant, J.1. Heard all the learned Counsel; Shri R. S. Apte for the heirs of Appellant No. 1, Shri A. A. Kumbhakoni for the heirs of original respondent No.1. Shri K.K. Tated, Assistant Government Pleader for Charity Commissioner, and State of Maharashtra, Respondents Nos. 2 and 3.2. This appeal of 1979 has been placed before us pursuant to the order passed by the learned Chief Justice on a reference made by a learned Single Judge on 17th August 1994 for deciding the following three questions:(1) Whether an appeal filed under section 72(4) of Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 is subject to restrictions and limitations imposed on a 'Second Appeal' as prescribed under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure? Whether an appeal under section 72(4) of the Act is maintainable even on questions of fact, mixed questions of fact and law or mere question of law?(2) Whether the trust known as Gangubai's Shri Datta Trust, situate at Solapur created under the Deed of Trust dated 13th...
Pramod S/O Laxmanrao Yadav Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-05-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)BomCR815
ORDERA.D. MANE, J.1. Heard Shri Barlota, Counsel for petitioner and Shri Chitlarge, A.G.R for respondents No. 1 and 3.2. We perused the Return filed on behalf of the respondent No. 1.3. Out of 3 seats, reserved for Project Affected persons, 2 seats have already been filled In. The grievance of the petitioner is that the students, who were, selected from the category of Project Affected persons have secured less marks than the petitioner. We, however, find no merit in this grievance of the petitioner. A distinguishable feature in the case is that the students having less marks than the marks obtained by petitioner, who have already been admitted, are the sons of the Project Affected persons whereas the petitioner is a grand-son of the Project Affected person. We are of the view that the sons have more preferential rights than the grand-sons under the scheme. We, therefore, find that this distinction by itself will make the petitioner disentitle for reservation to the seats which have al...
Neptune Wires Private Ltd. Vs. Precision Shears and Knives Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-05-1997
Reported in: 1998(3)ALLMR71; 1998(4)BomCR406; 1998(2)MhLj58
ORDERV.R. Datar, J.1. Petitioner and respondents both are companies. After discussion and negotiations, contract was entered into between the petitioners and respondents for supply of heavy duty four-High Rolling Mill, as per specifications given in the contract as contained in letter dated 3rd October, 1991 at Exhibit A to Petition No. 20 of 1996. It is unnecessary to reproduce various terms of the agreement, but the one material for the present purpose is about the dispute viz. in case of any dispute between the parties, the same shall be referred to the Arbitrators who should have the technical Knowledge and the same shall be done as per Indian Arbitration Act. It appears that a dispute arose between the parties and, therfore, by letter dated 27th November, 1992 at Exhibit B (to Petition No. 20/91), respondent informed the petitioners that the respondent had appointed one Shri Amin of M/s National Dia Casting as their Arbitrator and called upon the petitioners to appoint their Arbit...
Noor Mohammed Yusuf Nakade Vs. Alisaheb Mohamed Mukadam
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-04-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALLMR541; 1998(2)BomCR614
ORDERS. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Heard Shri Rege for the appellant, Shri Kazi for the respondent. The brief factual background is as under :The respondent herein was the original plaintiff who had filed a simplicitor suit for a perpetual injunction restraining the defendant i.e. the appellant herein from causing any obstruction to his possession of the suit land. In the said suit the respondent had also prayed for the relief that if he was not in possession, a decree for possession should be passed in his favour. This was Regular Civil Suit No. 76 of 1983. It was the case of respondent before the trial Court that the land was originally in possession of one Hamid Fakirmiya Mukadam and after a family partition the plaintiff, namely the respondent herein was in possession and became a owner and kabjedar of the land. This pertains to Survey No. 303-A Hissa No. 3 admeasuring 5 Gunthas of land situated at village Karabude. It is an admitted position that this land was originally 'Khoti land' and...
itc Limited Vs. Holbud Limited and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-04-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALLMR268; (1997)99BOMLR755
S.S. Nijjar, J.1. The present suit has been filed by the plaintiffs against the defendants claiming a number of reliefs. It is claimed that there is no valid, binding or concluded contract in existence between the plaintiff and the defendants for the sale by the plaintiff to the defendant No. 1 of 13500 metric tonnes of Indian White long grain rice either on the terms and conditions set out in the fax messages dated 14th July, 1995 and/or 15th July, 1995 which are attached to the plaint as Exhibits G, H and I addressed by defendant No. 3 acting for defendant No. 1 and/or in the fax dated 14th July, 1995, Exhibit DD to the plaint, allegedly sent by defendant No. 2 to defendant No. 1 It is also claimed that the fax allegedly sent by defendant No. 2 to defendant No. 1 Exhibit DD, is invalid, illegal and not binding on the plaintiffs. It is further claimed that defendant No. 2 had no authority to issue the same and in any event at the time when defendant No. 2 purportedly sent the said fax...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »