Mumbai Court April 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.
Dilkush Dyeing and Printing Works Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-15-1997
Reported in: 1998(97)ELT237(Bom)
1. In these notices of Motion which have been taken out by the Respondents, the Court is vexed with the only question whether the Petitioners M/s. Dilkhush Dyeing and Printing Works and M/s. Premier Textile Processors or the Respondents are entitled to the interest which has accrued on the amounts deposited in the Court with the Prothonotary & Senior Master pursuant to the directions of the Supreme Court, and can be disposed of by a common order. 2. For consideration of the issue in controversy a brief resume of the facts leading to the controversy can be stated as under. 3. The Petitioners preferred Writ Petition No. 394 of 1979 and Writ Petition No. 395 of 1979 respectively inter alia challenging the imposition of duty on the value of grey fabrics in addition to the value of the processing charges etc. By way of interim relief vide order dated 19th April, 1979, the Petitioners were directed to furnish a Bank Guarantee for the full amount as claimed by the Respondent-Department. There...
Garware Nylons Limited Vs. Swastik Yarns
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-15-1997
Reported in: (1997)99BOMLR497
R.M. Lodha, J.1. M/s. Garware Nylons Limited - the Plaintiff has filed the suit for recovery of Rs. 12,26,043.78 ps. against M/s. Swastik yarns-the Defendant as per the particulars of claims Exhibit-'Z' annexed to the Plaint with future interest on principal sum of Rs. 10,70,898.22 ps. at the rate of 21 per cent per annum till payment or realisation.2. According to the Plaintiff, the Defendant used to place telephonic orders to the Plaintiff at Bombay for supply of Nylons Filaments yarns and Polyester yarns, and subsequently, the orders placed by the Defendants were confirmed. The Plaintiff's case is that as per the various purchase orders placed by the Defendant to the Plaintiff, it sold, supplied and delivered Nylon Filaments yarns and Polyester yarns to the Defendant during the period from 30th June, 1992 till 19th June, 1993. The bills were raised by the Plaintiff against each delivery upon the Defendant, and the Defendant used to make part of amounts but never paid the complete am...
Indian Seamless Steels and Alloys Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-14-1997
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT494Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The issue relates to denial of capital goods, Modvat credit under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules amounting to Rs. 26,99,123.80, which has been demanded under provisions to Rule 57U of the Central Excise Rules from the appellants. The materials on which capital goods Modvat credit has been denied are : These are installed in their factory for carrying various fluids and gases; This is used for charging, scrap and pig iron in electric arc furnace and moving molten ferro alloy from furnace to different mills; This is meant for moving material goods with the assistance of conveyors for rolling etc., It operates valves located at different points in the plant when plant is in operation.; These are used to connect power to the main plant and to interconnect control panels, furnaces, E.O.T. cranes and other machinery used for processing materials; These are microprocessors used in different equipments which assist in smooth control over the operations of plant; These are used to sup...
Balkrishna Arjun Jadhav and Others Vs. Thane Municipal Corporation and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-11-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)BomCR299; 1997(3)MhLj260
ORDERM.B. Shah, C.J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. In our view, there is no substance in this petition. Notices dated 19th February 1997 under section 89 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966 ('the MRTP Act, for short) are issued to the petitioners. It has been pointed out that Town Planning Scheme (the Scheme for short) in respect of the area in question is finalised in the year 1985. According to the Scheme, the plot in dispute is allotted to respondents Nos. 4 to 8. As some persons trespassed upon the land in question after finalisation of the Scheme, respondents Nos. 4 to 8, filed writ petition bearing No. 1404 of 1989 in this Court against the Corporation for a direction to hand over actual and physical possession of the said land. In the said writ petition, the Division Bench of this Court (N.D. Vyas and S.S. Nijjar, JJ.) passed an order directing respondents to hand over actual possession of the land in dispute. Thereafter, the Corporation has iss...
Central Bank of India Vs. Madalsa International Ltd. and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-11-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Bom310; 1997(3)ALLMR270
1. The defendants by this chamber summons pray that the execution of the decree dated 16-04-1996 passed by this Court against any of assets of defendants in particular that of defendant Nos. 2 and 3 be stayed.2. In the affidavit in support of the chamber summons, it is averred that defendant No. 1 has filed reference with the Board for Industrial and Finance Reconstruction (for short B.I.F.R.) on 09-03-1997 and since the defendant Nos. 2 and 3 are guarantors they are also entitled to protection under Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (for short SICA, 1985) and decree cannot be executed against their estate without obtaining permission of B.I.F.R.3. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel appearing for defendants informed the Court that the reference has been registered on 10-04-1997 bearing Case No. 47 of 1997.4. The decree holder Central Bank of India has filed affidavit in reply contesting the Chamber Summons taken out by the de...
L.i.C. of India Vs. Ramesh Chandra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-11-1997
Reported in: 1998(3)BomCR439
ORDERS.S. Chadha, Member1. This Revision petition has arisen out of the order dated 22-7-96 passed by the Madhya Pradesh State Commission at Bhopal dismissing the appeal and upholding the order dated 29-11-95 of the District Forum- Dewas allowing the complaint and directing the Life Insurance Corporation of India- Opposite party, (for short called L.I.C.) to pay Rs. 50,000/- in (sic to) the complainant within two months from 29-11-95 and also pay Rs. 150/- as costs of the case.2. The facts are not in dispute and may be briefly noticed. The complainant had taken a life insurance Policy No. 34180460 commencing from 27th March, 1993, for Rs. 50,000/- under 15 years money back policy with profit (with accident benefit). Under the terms of the policy, the sum assured together with accrued bonus was payable on death before the stipulated date of maturity and in case of survival, 25% of the sum assured was payable after 5 years, another 25% after 10 years and the remaining 50% of the sum assu...
Madhukar Dattoba Jadhav and Another Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-11-1997
Reported in: 1998BomCR(Cri)87
ORDERV.H. Bhairavia,J. 1. This appeal is preferred against the order of conviction and sentence dated 26th August, 1983, passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Punein Sessions Case No. 255 of 1982. The appellant No. 1 has been convicted for offence punishable under section 302 I.P.C. and he has been sentenced to suffer R.I. for life and he has also been convicted for offence punishable under section 323 r/w. section 34 I.P.C. and sentenced to suffer R.I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 300/-, in default to suffer R.I. for two months. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The appellant No. 2 has been convicted for the offence punishable under section 323 r/w section 34 I.P.C. and he has been sentenced to suffer R.I. for six months and to pay fine of Rs. 300/-, in default to suffer R.I. for two months punishable under section 323 r/w section 34 I.P.C. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that, on 17-8-1982 at about 9.30 p.m., P.W. 2 complainant Ashok was...
Dr. (Mrs.) Swati Satish Kelshikar Vs. Shankar Kuddu Shetty and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-11-1997
Reported in: (1997)99BOMLR325
F.I. Rebello, J.1. The Applicant has approached this Court against the Order dated 25th August, 1995 passed in Bombay City Civil Court S.C. Suit No. 3410 of 1995. By the said order the trial Court disposed of the issue framed in para 5 of the order. It was a composite issue consisting of two issues viz.(1) Whether the Court had no pecuniary jurisdiction?(2) Whether by virtue of Sections 71 and 177 of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act the jurisdiction of the Court was barred.?The trial Court rejected both the issues and held that the Court has jurisdiction.2. In so far as the ouster of jurisdiction by virtue of Sections 71 and 177 of Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act is concerned, the reliefs herein prayed are by the Applicant against the Respondent No. 1. Admittedly, the Respondent No. 1 was allotted the premises by Respondent No. 2. The suit filed by the Plaintiff is for declaration that the agreement arrived at between him and the Applicant is null and void ...
Laxman Balappa Bokade Vs. Vithoba Khandappa Bokade and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-11-1997
Reported in: (1998)100BOMLR210
A.Y. Sakhare, J.1. The present petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 19th December, 1990 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal In Revision Application No. MRT/SH/VI/22/89.2. The facts relevant for the present petition are as under.The disputes relate to Land Gat No. 82 area admeasuring 85 areas situated at village Chapalgaon in Akkalkot Taluka of Solapur District. The petitioner claims tenancy rights while the respondent No. 1 is a landlord of the same. A Regular Civil Suit No. 63 of 1983 is filed by the respondent-landlord for possession. Upon pleadings, the following issues came to be framed and referred to the Tenancy authority under Section 85A of the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for sake of brevity).Issue No. 3 : Whether the defendant proves that he is in possession of land as tenant.3. The Reference was numbered as Tenancy Case No. 85-A/2/1985. The Tahsildar, Akkalkot by his judgment and order dated 5th...
Smt. Jeevanbai Mistrilal Raisoni Deceased Through L. Rs. and ors. Vs. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-11-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALLMR737; (1998)100BOMLR42
F.I. Rebelloe, J.1. The Applicants by this revision application have approached this Court to quash and set aside the Order dated 9th December, 1994 passed below Exhibits 87 and 92 in Civil Appeal No. 138 of 1996 by learned District Judge, Solapur.2. A brief narration of the facts will be required for the purpose of disposing of the present revision application. The Applicants herein, the original Plaintiff, instituted a suit against one Jasraj for eviction. The said suit was decreed. Aggrieved by the said Order, Jasraj preferred an Appeal before the District Judge.3. During the pendency of the Appeal, Jasraj expired. Consequent upon the death of Jasraj an application was moved by one Tarachand being Exhibit No. 27. It is contended therein that the heirs of Jasraj were his son Ghisulal, Bhawarbai the widow of another son of deceased Jasraj, Tarachand and Suganchand who were his nephews. The Appellate Court by an Order dated 25th October, 1989 allowed the said application without notice...