Mumbai Court December 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.
Batliboi and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-1997
Reported in: (1998)(97)ELT307Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The jurisdictional Asstt. Commissioner of Central Excise passed an order dated 28-12-1990 disallowing Modvat credit on grinding wheels on the ground that these are fixed on the machinery and did not form part of inputs as it was not, according to the Asstt. Commissioner, used in or in relation to the manufacture of final product. It was found that grinding wheel is used for smoothening the surface of the components manufactured. The Asstt. Commissioner's order was upheld by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai in the above captioned order.2. Shri M.H. Patil, the ld. Counsel for the appellants, submits that the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Union Carbide India Ltd. v. Collector -1996 (86) E.L.T. 613 (Tribunal) construed the meaning of the term 'input' Under Rule 57A as of wide ambit covering materials which are used and are concerned with the manufacturing process. The ld. Counsel submitted that following the ratio, the Larger Bench in the...
Foundry Agri. and Mining Equip. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-1997
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT947Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellants manufacture machinery falling under Chapter 84 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The department found that the appellants were charging commissioning and erection charges for the machines installed by them at their customer's premises through issue of separate bills/invoices. It was further found that the appellants did not include these charges in the assessable value of the machines for which they filed price list. Proceedings were, therefore, initiated for including these charges in the assessable value and duty demand for Rs. 22,500/- was issued for the period between January and Feb., 1985.After hearing the appellants and considering their reply, the Addl.Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Vadodara held that the installation and commissioning charges charged by the assessee from his customers will form a part of the assessable value in terms of the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Union of India v. Bombay Tyre International reported in 1983 (14...
M/S. Rita Steel (Registered Firm) Vs. JainuddIn and Brothers
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALLMR332; 1998(2)BomCR764; 1998(1)MhLj416
ORDERV.S. Sirpurkar, J. 1. Rule. Heard finally with the consent of the parties. 2. All that has the trial Court ordered was to allow the plaintiff firm to file the certificate of registration of the firm and some other documents including the original power of attorney and Bank statements. The defendants objected to the filing of the Certificate of Registration of firm on the ground that under section 69(2) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, there is a complete bar to file the certificate of registration at later stage. The trial Court took the view, based on a reported judgment in Kantilal Chandmal Dhanmandi Ratlam v. Gopal Lal, (1996) 1 C.L.T. 488 that the certificate of registration cannot be filed at the later stage. It is this order which is challenged in this Civil Revision Application. 3. It is nobody's case that the said registration certificate is being filed at a hopelessly late stage and its filing would prejudice the other side because it seems that a statement is made in...
The Tata Hydro-Electric Power Supply Co. Ltd. and others Vs. Tata Hydr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALLMR486; 1998(3)BomCR128; (1998)1BOMLR597; [1998(79)FLR202]; 1998(1)MhLj915
ORDERF.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule.2. Learned Counsel for the respondents waive service. By consent made returnable and heard forthwith.3. The petitioners herein had objected to the workmen respondent being represented by their legal advisor who is a practising advocate in a pending domestic enquiry.The complaint was filed by the workmen before the Labour Court contending that the action of the petitioners in not permitting an office bearer of the Union to represent him at the domestic enquiry amounts to an unfair labour practice. An application for interim relief was also moved. The Labour Court by order dated 5thApril 1997 permitted the complainant to be represented by the legal adviser. Aggrieved by the said action, the petitioners herein preferred a revision application before the Industrial Court at Mumbai. The Industrial Court by its order dated 1st September 1997 rejected the revision application preferred by the petitioner herein. In so holding the Industrial Court proceeded on the f...
Pushpa Prakash Kalpande Vs. Collector, Amravati and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALLMR779; 1998(4)BomCR443; 1998(1)MhLj323
ORDERA.V. Savant, J.1. Heard all the learned Counsel.2. The short point which arises for consideration in this petition is whether the third respondent who has been elected as a member of Gram Panchayat Jawala (Bk.) in Tahsil Anjagoan Surji from the seat reserved for woman O.B.C. is ineligible to contest the electron for the Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat, which post, as per the roaster settled in accordance with the 1964 Rules for Election of the Sarpanch and Upsarpanch under the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, has been reserved for the woman General category. A perusal of the notice at Annexure C dated 21st August, 1995 shows that in accordance with the said roaster, the post of Sarpanch of Jawala (Bk.) Gram Panchayat (item No.37 in notice at Annexure C) has been reserved for 'Woman General Category'. The petitioner is undoubtedly elected as a member of the Gram Panchayat from the seat reserved for General category (Woman). Relying upon the decision of the Apex Court in Saraswati...
Mukesh R. Chheda Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALLMR19; 1998(4)BomCR14; 1998BomCR(Cri)714
ORDERS.S. Parkar, J.1. Rule. By consent rule is made returnable forthwith. Mr. Mhaispurkar A.P.P. waives service on behalf of the respondents.2. Heard Mr. Kanuga on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Mhaispurkar, A.P.P. for State.3. The petitioner had applied to the respondent No. 2 on 11-11-1997 for grant of licence for video games under the provisions of section 33(1)(w)(i) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951. The said application not having been disposed of by the Commissioner of Police, this petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking direction against the said authority to dispose of the application.4. There should be no difficulty in granting such petition and issuing directions to the Commissioner of Police to consider and dispose of the application made by the petitioner within a reasonable time. Mr. Mhaispurkar, A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the respondents seeks time of four weeks on behalf of the authorities for disposal of the said application. T...
People's Union for Civil Liberties and others Vs. the State of Maharas ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-1997
Reported in: 1998BomCR(Cri)741; (1998)1BOMLR431; 1998CriLJ2138
ORDERA.P. Shah, J. 1. These writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution have been filed by two non-political organisations namely, People's Union of Civil Liberties (PUCL) and the Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights (CPDR) and the President of the Samajwadi Party for issuance of appropriate directions instituting a judicial inquiry into the deaths occurred in alleged police encounters which have taken place in Mumbai in recent times, and to further direct the State Government to take action against the erring police officers. In Writ Petition No. 1032 of 1997 filed by the President of Samajwadi Party, an inquiry is specifically sought in the death of one Abu Sayma alias Javed who was killed in a police encounter on 28th August, 1997. A direction for awarding compensation to the members of the family of the deceased is also prayed for.2. The petitioners say that during the last couple of years various incidents have taken place which are described as 'encounters' by t...
Union of India Vs. Devidas Construction
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-09-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALLMR381
V.R. Datar, J.1. The Union of India through Executive Engineer, Department of Telecommunications, Civil Wing, Sion, Bombay, has filed this petition under Section 30 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 for setting aside the award made and published by the sole Arbitrator Mr. J. Pal on 13th April, 1994. 2. The respondent is a proprietary concern carrying on business as engineers and civil contractors. Tenders were invited for the work of construction of cable duct from Prabhadevi T.E. building to Bandra T.E. building sub head Part II 32 way duct from MH014 to MH024. The respondent submitted their tender on 3rd September, 1987 and this tender was accepted. A contract bearing No. 18/EET/BII/87-88 was entered into between the parties on 27-1-1987. This agreement contained an arbitration clause in case disputes and differences arose between the parties. The work was to commence on 13-12-1987 and was to be completed within 6 months i.e., on or before 11-6-1988. According to petitioner, the re...
Union of India Through Executive Engineer, Dept. of Telecommunication ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-09-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)BomCR424
ORDERV.R. Datar, J.1. The Union of India through Executive Engineer, Department of Telecommunications, Civil Wing, Sion, Bombay, has filed this petition under section 30 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 for setting aside the award made and published by the sole arbitrator Mr. J. Pal on 13th April 1992.2. The respondent is a proprietary concern carrying on business as engineers and civil contractors. Tenders were invited for the work of construction of cable duct from Prabhadevi T.E. building to Bandra T.E. building sub head Part II 32 way duct from MHO 14 to MHO 24. The respondent submitted their tender on 3rd September 1987 and this tender was accepted. A contract being No. 18/EET/BII/87-88 was entered into between the parties on 27 11-1987. This agreement contained an arbitration Clause in case disputes and differences arose between the parties. The work was to commence on 13-12-1987 and was to be completed within 6 months i.e. on or before 11-6-1988. According to petitioner, the ...
Ahmed R.V. Peermohamed and Another Vs. J.B. Chinai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-09-1997
Reported in: 1998(3)ALLMR587; 1998(2)BomCR795
ORDERD.G. Deshpande, J. Heard advocates for the plaintiff and defendant. Plaintiff isthe tenant of the suit premises which consists of a cabin and outer room fully furnished with furnitures, fixtures etc. A plan of the suit premises is filed by the defendant in his affidavit in reply at pages 17, 18 and 23. According to the plaintiff, the defendant who was the plaintiff's advocate since 1979 was allowed by the plaintiff in 1985 to occupy the suit premises i.e. the cabin and the outer room and the defendant was to use the suit premises from 3.00 p.m. onwards on every day from Monday to Friday and till about 1.00 p.m. on Saturday. 2. The disputes between the parties started in 1996-97 regarding right to occupy the suit premises and therefore the present suit is filed for a declaration that the defendant has no right whatsoever in the suit premises, for a mandatory injunction order, the defendant to remove his articles and belongings and for other reliefs. The motion is taken out by the p...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »