Mumbai Court March 1997 Judgments
The Divisional Controller, Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporatio ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-1997
Reported in: (1997)99BOMLR471
B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order 18th September, 1992 made by the Appellate Authority in Appeal (PGA) No. 5 of 1990 under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The Petitioner is the Divisional Controller of Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Sangli Division. The Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation is a statutory Corporation carrying on the business of transporting passengers by Bus in the State of Maharashtra. The First Respondent is an ex-employee of the Petitioner. The First Respondent was employed as Art 'A' Mechanic in 1966 in the Sangli Division of the Petitioner Corporation and was working in the Depot at Tasgaon. Under the Service Regulations the First Respondent was required to produce proof of his date of birth. Though the First Respondent had made a declaration at the time of joining of service that his date of birth w...
Tag this Judgment!Snp Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Kara Mara Shipping Co. Lt ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-1997
Reported in: 1997(4)ALLMR590; (1997)99BOMLR651
M.S. Rane, J.1. The subject matter of both the suits herein is the maritime claim arising due to collision between the two vessels Ya Mawlaya and m.t. New World which occurred on 21.12.94 in the international water i.e. coast of Portugal i.e. in the Atlantic Ocean. Plaintiffs in Suit No. 28 of 1996 M/s. Kara Mara Shipping Company Limited, a Cyprus based company are the owners of the vessel Ya Mawlaya. Defendant No. 1 M/s. World Tanker Carriers Corporation are Liberian based company and the owners of the vessel m.t. New World.2. Both the suits have been filed under Part XA of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said act' for brevity sake) seeking limitation of their liabilities in respect of any claim arising due to said collision.3. Defendant No. 1 in Suit No. 28 of 1996, the owners of the colliding vessel m.t. New World have taken strong objection to the maintainability of both the suits asserting that this Court has no jurisdiction to try and entertain th...
Tag this Judgment!Muljimal N. Raghuvanshi Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1997
Reported in: [1997]225ITR586(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the assessee : 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and proper interpretation of section 147 of the Income-tax Act, was the Tribunal justified in law in upholding the reopening of the assessment ?' 2. The facts of the case are as under : 3. The assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1959-60 was originally completed on July 31, 1962, and his income was computed at Rs. 23,778. The assessee had filed wealth-tax returns for the assessment years 1958-59 and 1959-60 on July 26, 1962, and in the said returns, the assessee had disclosed circulating capital of Rs. 30,000 but in the wealth-tax returns for the assessment year 1960-61, the circulating capital had gone up to Rs. 1,25,000. Because of this, in the course of the assessment for the assessment year 196...
Tag this Judgment!Salgaonkar Mining Industries Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1997
Reported in: [1997]228ITR183(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the assessee : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the payments made by the assessee-company to Zacaria Antao and Babul Naik Tari under the agreements dated December 13, 1975, and July 14, 1975, were expenditure of a capital nature ?' 2. This reference pertains to the assessment year 1978-79. The assessee was engaged in the business of screening iron ore, sale of iron ore, making provision for truck transport and barge transport. On July 14, 1975, the assessee entered into an agreement with one Mr. Babul Naik Tari, who was the owner of a mining concession of iron ore, viz., 'Chormola', for raising iron ore from the said mine. On December 14, 1975, the assessee entered into another agreement with one Mr. Zacar...
Tag this Judgment!Chandrakant Damodar Kale Vs. Nagpur Improvement Trust and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1997
Reported in: 1997(3)ALLMR346; 1997(4)BomCR607; (1997)3BOMLR210; 1997(3)MhLj30
L. Manoharan, J.1. The petitioner who was Assistant Engineer with the 1st respondent Nagpur Improvement Trust (for short 'the Trust'), challenges his order of suspension dated 2.5.1983 and the order of discharge dated 15.7.1985 (Annexures 'A and W'). 2. The petitioner was initially appointed in the 1st respondent Trust as an Assistant Overseer and later he earned promotion as the Assistant Engineer and while he was working in that capacity as the Assistant Engineer, pending enquiry into the certain allegations against him, kept him under suspension by Annexure 'A'. Later, he was served with Annexure 'G' the charge-sheet which contained four charges against him : Charge No. 1 'While serving under the Nagpur Improvement Trust, Nagpur as Assistant Engineer, you were engaged in the business run by M/s. M. K. Associates and M/s. Shree Constructions and doing business, this act of your is in contravention of Rule 16 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1979 and constitutes a m...
Tag this Judgment!Dayaram Chandramohan Kanswal Vs. the Inspector of Police, Kapurbawdi P ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1997
Reported in: 1998BomCR(Cri)95; 1997CriLJ2713
ORDERA.V. Savant, J. 1. Heard both the learned Counsel. 2. The petition is by an unfortunate father whose daughter deceased Mangaleshwari was married to Bhagwati Prasad Samwal at Ulhasnagar, Thane. It is stated in the petition that the marriage had put great financial strain on the petitioner and had virtually crippled him financially, since the petitioner was required to provide several items in lieu of dowry. It is alleged that a room at Manpada in Thane was also required to be purchased for the son-in-law Bhagwati Prasad and the petitioner had to spend Rs. 56,000/- for the room. Despite this, whenever the poor girl Mangaleshwari visited her parents, she was complaining of harassment and cruelty and demand of additional items such as sewing machine etc. Mangaleshwari was being taunted saying that if Bhagwati Prasad had married some other girl, he would have got more than Rs. 3,00,000/--as dowry. 3. In the morning of 6th July, 1996 when the petitioner visited his daughter's house viz....
Tag this Judgment!Pratap Bhaskar Chandan Vs. R.D. Tyagi and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-25-1997
Reported in: (1997)99BOMLR324
S.S. Parkar, J.1. By this petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged his detention under the provisions of National Security Act, 1980. The detention order dated 8th April, 1996, was issued by the respondent No. 1, Commissioner of Police, Greater Bombay, against the petitioner under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner was detained on the same date i.e. 8th April, 1996. The order of detention issued by respondent No. 1 is annexed as Annexure A to this petition. At the time of his detention, the petitioner was also served with the ground of detention dated 8th April 1996 which are annexed as Annexure B to this petition. There is no dispute that at the time of his detention the petitioner was served with the aforesaid order of detention as well as the grounds of detention along with their Marathi translations.2. The above detention order is challenged by this petition on various grounds. Bu...
Tag this Judgment!Colaba Central Co-operative Consumers' Wholesale and Retail Stores Ltd ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-21-1997
Reported in: [1998]229ITR209(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this Court for opinion at the instance of the assessee : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee cannot claim a deduction either under s. 37 or s. 28 of the amount set apart for the capital contribution redemption fund ?' 2. This reference pertains to the asst. yr. 1975-76. The assessee is a co-operative society registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. Under the Scheme of financial assistance to the Consumer Co-operatives under the Centrally sponsored scheme, the State Government contributed to the share capital of the assessee co-operative society a sum of Rs. 21 Lakhs. An agreement was entered into between the State Government and the assessee co-operative society for that purpose. As per the terms of the agreement, the share capital contribution of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Standard Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-21-1997
Reported in: (1997)142CTR(Bom)16; [1998]229ITR366(Bom)
DR. B.P. Saraf, J. 1. By this reference under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee, the Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this Court for opinion. 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the show cause notice received from the Central Excise Department cannot be equated with or considered to be a demand notice and thus erred in not allowing the claim of excise duty amounting to Rs. 46,86,431 ?' 2. The assessee is a limited company engaged in the business of manufacturing textiles. This reference pertains to asst. yr. 1979-80, the relevant previous year being the financial year ending 31st March, 1979. In its return of income for the above assessment year under the IT Act, 1961 ('the Act'), the assessee claimed deduction of a sum of Rs. 46,86,431 on account of excise duty on the basis of show cause-cum-demand notices for the years 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1978-79 received by the assesse...
Tag this Judgment!Vasant Waman Aher Vs. Shri Kalu Jana Gaveet and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-21-1997
Reported in: II(1998)ACC183; 1998ACJ268; 1997(3)ALLMR230; 1997(4)BomCR467
R.G. Vaidyanatha, J.1. All these appeals are directed against the common judgment and order dated 23-1-1987 in M.A.C. Petitions Nos. 1 to 19, 39 and 40 of 1983 on the file of the Member, M.A.C.T., Nasik. Common arguments were heard on these three appeals and all these three appeals arise out of one and the same accident and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. In the first appeal, claimants had filed Claim Petition No. 20 of 1983, the second appeal arises out of the Claim Petition No. 10 of 1983 and the third appeal arises from the Claim Petition No. 8 of 1983. All these claim petitions arise out of an accident that took place on 6-6-1982 at about 8.15 p.m. The case of the claimants is that on 6-6-1982 about 22 persons were travelling in Lorry MWN 56 along with their goods viz., rice bags from Surgana to Alangun; the truck belongs to the first appellant and the second appellant was the driver of the truck at the relevant time. It is the case of the claimant that the truck ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »