Mumbai Court May 1997 Judgments
Krantikari Surakseva Rakshak Sanghatana Vs. the Security Guards Board ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-06-1997
Reported in: 1997(3)ALLMR247; 1997(4)BomCR522
Y.S. Jahagirdar, J. 1. This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner - Trade Union on behalf of its 4 members viz. S/Shri A.B. Jadhav, D.L. Mahanty, N.G. Dhumak, who had been working as Security Guards with respondent No. 2 and Shri M.M. Kamble who had been working as Security Guard with respondent No. 3 Though the petitioner seeks general declaratory reliefs, Mr. Singhavi, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, restricted the same to four employees as mentioned hereinabove.2. So far as S/Shri A.B. Jadhav, D.L. Mahanty and M.G. Dhumak are concerned, their services were allotted to respondent No. 2 - Tata Electric Companies Unit 6. On a complaint dated 4th of July 1988 from respondent No. 2 that S/Shri Jadhav and Mahanty did not wait for their reliever, their services were withdrawn by the Board treating the said act as misconduct. The withdrawal is alleged to be immediately after 4th of July 1988 though the exact date is ...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Ratan Vida Sude and Another Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-06-1997
Reported in: 1998BomCR(Cri)131; 1998(1)MhLj54
ORDERVishnu Sahai, J.1. The appellants aggrieved by the Judgment and order dated 1-1-1990, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule, in Sessions, Case No. 149 of 1989, convicting and sentencing them to undergo 3 years Rl for an offence under section 304 I.PC., have come up in appeal before me.2. In short, the prosecution case is that both the appellants are closely related inasmuch as their wives are real sisters. Two to three days prior to the incident, there was religious ceremony at the house of father of the informant Kantibai P.W. 2 in village Jhamb, District Dhule. In this ceremony, the appellant Mala also participated and thereafter took lunch at about 12 noon and slept. Kantibai's husband, the deceased Badhu on seeing Mala sleeping in Kantibai's father's house, suspected her fidelity and told Mala not to visit either his father-in-law's house or his house.On 24-5-1989, at about 9 p.m. the deceased Bhadu, his brother Laxman, his wife Kantibai and aunt Savitri were sitting ...
Tag this Judgment!Sukhdev Singh Jamval Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-06-1997
Reported in: (1997)99BOMLR280
D.G. Deshpande, J.1. I heard Mr. Bagaria for the Petitioner and Mr. Mehta For the C.B.I. In this case, previously. I heard arguments of Mr.C.G. Gavnekar who appeared for the Petitioner; State was represented by Smt. J.S. Pawar. After hearing the parties, the petition was partly allowed and the proceedings in Special Case No. 27/92 were quashed and set aside.2. This was done by me on the basis of a ruling of this Court which was relied upon and cited by Mr. Gavnekar i.e. reported in 1995 (1) M.L.J. 558 - State of Maharashtra v. Ramkrishna Dorkar delivered by Mr. Justice R.M. Lodha. This Judgment in consequence was based upon a Judgment of Mr. Justice M.F. Saldanha Ishwar Piraj Kalpatri and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 1993 M.L.J. 1523. Within couple of days of my order dt 18th February, 1997, I came across the judgment of Supreme Court reported in State of Maharashtra Ors. v. Ishwar Piraji Kalpatri : 1996CriLJ1127 - by which the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of Mr. Justic...
Tag this Judgment!Hindustan Motors Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-05-1997
Reported in: (1998)(100)ELT432Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellants herein filed a refund claim for Rs. 1,13,374/- under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962, on the ground that the goods were exempted from Additional Duty of Customs (CVD) as per Section 20 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Central Excise Notification No. 263/79. The Assistant Collector of Customs, Bombay refund department rejected the claim on a question of jurisdiction. The Appeal against the Assistant Commissioner's order was also rejected by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai in the impugned order. The Collector (Appeals) found that the appellants' goods were allowed clearance under bond without payment of duty in terms of Notification No. 263/79 and that when the same goods are re-imported under provisions of Section 20 of the Customs Act, 1962, the Collector (Appeals) found they shall be regulated by the provisions of Section 20 of the Act, and have to pay duty thereunder.2. We have heard Shri V. Prabhakar the Assistant Manager for the appellant and Shr...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Asha Arun Gawli Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-05-1997
Reported in: (1997)99BOMLR240
A.A. Desai, J.1. Broadly this petition is directed against the order dated 20.2.1997 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai in exercise of power under Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 directing detention of one Arun Gulabrao Gawli. However, the petition has focused on numerous aspects of serious repercussion. We have, therefore, heard the matter for a considerable period.2. Preface to grounds of detention has described the detenu as a person with violent character, notorious gang leader and weapon wielding desperado. It is averred that even while in Jail, he was operating and was giving directions, indulging in criminal activities like extortion, terrorism, master minding murders, etc. through members of the gang. He has been almost running a parallel administration attempting to nullify the very existence of law enforcing Authorities. While in Jail, he has been indulging in contract killing of important people.3. During the course of hearing of this petition, it is r...
Tag this Judgment!K.K. Sharma Vs. Smt. R.K. Chainani
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-05-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALLMR729; (1998)100BOMLR198
D.K. Deshmukh, J.1. By this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner challenges the order dated 27.6.1995 passed by the Division Bench of the Court of Small Causes at Bombay, Bandra Branch, in Appeal No. 105 of 1995. That appeal was filed by the present petitioner challenging the judgment and decree dated 19.1.1994 passed by the Court of Small Causes at Bombay in R.A.E. suit No. 926/3130 of 1984. That civil suit was filed by the present respondent Smt. R.K. Chainani claiming therein that she is the owner of the Flat No. 9 Gulmarg, Charan Kamal Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. plot No. 74, Prabhat Colony, Road No. 6, Santacruz (E) Bombay 55 and that the petitioner is the tenant of the said premises. She claimed that as her husband was in service with the Income Tax Department on his transfer to Vidharba Region in the year 1978 she had to shift to Nagpur. She further claimed that her husband has retired from service in the year 1982. She claimed that ...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Mangal W/O Kachru Korde Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)BomCR488
ORDERA.P. Shah, J.1. We are principally concerned in these two writ petitions with the interpretation of the amended provisions of section 67(5) of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short) and the rules framed thereunder providing for reservation to the posts of Chairperson in the Panchayat Samitis for the members belonging to the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes, Backward Class of Citizens and women. These provisions are enacted by the State Legislature in order to carry out the constitutional mandate of Article 243-D of the Constitution of India as inserted by the 73rd Amendment to the Constitution. The short question which falls for our determination is this: When the post of Chairperson of a Panchayat Samiti is reserved for category of Other Backward Class woman, a member who got elected from woman general category at the Panchayat elections is eligible to contest for the post of Chairperson even if she belongs to Other Backward Cl...
Tag this Judgment!Shankar S/O Khandu Kamble Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-1997
Reported in: 1998(3)ALLMR116; 1998(2)BomCR330
ORDERB.H. Marlapalle, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties,2. Rule made returnable forthwith with the consent of the parties.3. The petitioner came to be elected as member of Gram Panchayat, Pimpalgaon (Ku), Taluka Biloli from a ward reserved for Scheduled Caste Category. The post of the Sarpanch of village Pimpalgaon (Ku) came to be reserved for Scheduled Caste category and the elections were schedule for the said post of Sarpanch on 28-8-1995. In all, three members submitted their nomination forms to contest the election of theSarpanch and they were the petitioner, the respondent No. 6 and one Shankar Hajiram Gaikwad. However, said Shankar Hajiram withdrew his nomination form and the contest for the post of Sarpanch remained only between the petitioner and respondent No. 6. It is not disputed that respondent No. 6 was elected as member of the Gram Panchayat from Ward No. 2 which was not reserved for any category and was an open category ward.4. It is the allegation o...
Tag this Judgment!Ravindra Laxman Mahadik Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)BomCR297A; 1998BomCR(Cri)30A; 1997(3)MhLj213
ORDERVishnu Sahai, J.1. By this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 10-11-1995, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gr. Bombay, in Sessions Case No. 658 of 1992, whereby he has been convicted and sentenced to undergo 3 year's Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default Rigorous Imprisonment for one month, for an offence under section 392 read with 34 I.P.C.2. In short, the prosecution case is that on 20-2-1992, at about 9.30 p.m. when Smt. Manda Vinod Sahani, PW. 1 and her husband Shri Vinod Sahani, P.W. 2 and children were returning after attending the parent's Meeting and had reached part of the Juhu beach, behind Union Bank of India and Mayur Bungalow in Santacruz (West) Bombay, the appellant along with another on the point of knife, relieved Manda Sahani and Vinod Sahani of their valuables and money. The looted articles included mangalsutra and earrings belonging to Manda Sahani. Some money from the purse of Manda Sahani and ...
Tag this Judgment!Rajeev Silk Mills Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-01-1997
Reported in: (1999)(114)ELT469Tri(Mum.)bai
1. M/s. Rajeev Silk Mills the appellant in this appeal imported a consignment of Polyester Filament Yarn 50 deniers. It claimed clearance of the goods under an advanced licence issued on 20-9-1989 exemption from duty in terms of Notification 159/90. The department communicated to the importer its view that the advance licence was not valid for the goods, and clearance without payment of duty was not possible for the reason that the goods imported were not of identical specifications and technical characteristics as the goods used in the manufacture of the exported product, as replenishment of which, the import was made. The exported fabric was made out of Polyester filament yarn of deniers ranging from 78 to 172. The importer waived issue of written notice; but resisted these contentions during the hearing. The Additional Collector did not accept his point of view and passed orders holding that the goods imported were not intended for clearance under the advance licence produced, by e...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »