Mumbai Court July 1997 Judgments
Divisional Controller, M.S.R.T.C. Division Office Amravati Vs. Vinay V ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-31-1997
Reported in: 1998(4)BomCR437; 1998(2)MhLj156
ORDERS.S Dani, J.1. The petitioner-Corporation challenges the order of the Industrial Court, Arnravati, dated 17-2-1995, in Revision, U.L.P. No. 180 of 1987, under section 44 of the M.R.T.U. and P.U.L.P. Act, hereinafter 'the Act', setting aside the order dated 15-10-1987, of the Labour Court, Amravati, in Complaint, U.L.P. No. 223 of 1986, and directing the reinstatement of the present respondent on his former post as a fresh candidate.2. The respondent was inducted in the service of the present petitioner-Corporation as a Conductor. On 23-7-1984, the respondent, while on duty as conductor on the S.T. bus, on the route of Bhokardi to Arnravati, did not issue tickets to certain passengers. On checking the bus, bearing Registration No. 6877 at Seema Don, it was found that 35 passengers were travelling, and out of them, 8 were without tickets. It was further found that 4 passengers out of these 8 were travelling from Mangiya to Seema Don, and, had paid each Re. 1.50 Ps. as fare at the ti...
Tag this Judgment!Moreshwar S/O Deoraoji Date Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-31-1997
Reported in: 1998BomCR(Cri)544; 1998(1)MhLj490
ORDERS.B. Mhase, J.1. This criminal writ petition has been filed by the petitioner invoking powers of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure requesting this Court to quash and set aside the F.I.R. and the proceedings in Crime No. 247 of 1996 of the Ganeshpeth Police Station, Nagpur, by issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction.2. The petitioner herein is the District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies. Buldhana, appointed under section 3 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960.'The Police Station Officer of the Ganeshpeth Police Station, Nagpur, has registered the crime vide Crime No. 247 of 1996 against the petitioner under sections 120B, 109, 466 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 13(i)(d) read with 13(ii) and 15 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The petitioner was the District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies (City-1), Nagpur, for a period from 1-4-1993...
Tag this Judgment!Tata Oil Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-30-1997
Reported in: (1998)(97)ELT285Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant at the relevant time was a manufacturer of soap. After communicating its intention to the Superintendent by letter dated 31-3-1996, it removed after paying duty the cakes of soap manufactured by it along with a carton each for packing to various factories outside Bombay. The units in question packed the soap into the cartons and despatched the packets of soap to the depots of the appellants according to its directions. It is not in dispute that the soap was cleared from the factory the price of the packing material was included in its assessable value. The appellant utilised the credit on the duty paid on the cartons towards payment of duty on the packed soap. The Superintendent objected to the procedure on the ground that the appellant removed the goods without per-mission provided in Rule 57F.After exchange of some correspondence, the Superintendent by his order dated 12-12-1986 disallowed the credit on the ground that the action taken by the appellant was not in or...
Tag this Judgment!Metrochem Industries Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-30-1997
Reported in: (1997)(96)ELT114Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The application is for dispensing with the pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 6,28,064/- and of penalty Rs. 6,30,000/-. The Commissioner in the adjudication order has held that the applicants are not eligible for taking capital goods Modvat credit under Rule 57Q on Gear Boxes and Measuring Tanks.2. Ld. Counsel Shri R.S. Dinkar submitted that Gear Boxes by definition in the (sic) authority like the World Book Encyclopedia International (1996 Edition) Gear is a mechanical device that transfers rotating motion and power from one part of a machine to another. If such is function the Gear Boxes fully satisfied the definition of capital goods under Rule 57Q. So also measuring tanks is part of the plant which is used to have the exact quantity of raw material required for the final product.3. We have heard Shri S.V. Singh the ld. JDR. We find that the matter lies in a short compass and with the consent of the parties, we grant stay and take up the appeal itself.' Under Rule 57Q(i)(b) Capital Good...
Tag this Judgment!National Building Construction Corporation Limited Vs. Shri Ram Pal Si ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-30-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)BomCR427
ORDERR.M. Lodha, J.1. The petitioner National Building Construction Corporation Limited('employer industry') seeks to challenge the order dated 18th March, 1997 passed bythe Industrial Court. The fate of this writ petition depends on the answer to thequestion whether in relation to the employer industry the Central Government is the'appropriate Government' within the meaning of section 2(a) of the Industrial DisputesAct, 1947 (for short, I.D. Act') and if yes, the complaint filed by the employee was notmaintainable and Industrial Court had no jurisdiction to entertain and try the complaint.2. The employee filed the complaint against the employer industry for the allegedunfair labour practices on the part of the employer under Item-9, of Schedule-IV, of theMaharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour PracticesAct, 1971 (for short, MRTU & PULP Act') and it was prayed by the employee that theorder dated 8th July, 1992 and the other orders passed by the employer ...
Tag this Judgment!G.S. Khairkar Vs. M/S. CamlIn Limited
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-30-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)BomCR487; 1998(3)MhLj615
ORDERF.I. Rebello, J. 1. The petitioner workman had filed 3 complaint bearing No. 419 of 1994 before the 4th Labour Court at Thane. The respondent Company raised a preliminary issue that the petitioner was not a workman within the meaning of section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and as such the complaint ought to be dismissed on that count alone. On a preliminary issue being framed, the respondent Company examined two witnesses, petitioner did not examine any witness nor stepped into the witness box. By order dated 31st March, 1995, the Labour Court on a consideration of material before it and various judgments which are referred to in the order came to the conclusion that the petitioner was not doing work which is of a supervisory nature and consequently answered the issue in the negative. It held the petitioner to be workman. 2. Aggrieved by the said Order, the respondent Company preferred a revision application bearing No. 76 of 1995 before the Industrial Court at Thane....
Tag this Judgment!Shri P.D. Siddhaye Vs. G.N. Patwardhan and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-30-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)BomCR663; 1998(1)MhLj162
ORDERF.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. By consent Rule heard forthwith.2. The order of the Industrial Court, Pune, below Exhibit U-16 and UA-10 dated 30th April, 1997 is the subject matter of this petition. The petition arises from a complaint filed by the respondent No. 1 as the General Secretary of the Alias Copco Employees Federation. Atlas Copco India Limited, the respondent No. 2 herein was respondent No. 1 in the complaint and the present petitioner is the respondent No. 2 in the complaint.The substance of the complaint filed by the respondent is that though the complainant was duly elected General Secretary of the Atlas Copco Employees Union the Company refused to negotiate and act upon the Charter of Demand served by the Union on the respondent No. 2 Company. It was, therefore, alleged that the respondent No. 2 had committed an act of unfair labour practice falling under Item 5 of Schedule II and Items 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the M.R.T.U. & P.U.L.R Act, 1971. An application for inter...
Tag this Judgment!National Building Construction Corporation Ltd. Vs. Ram Pal Singh and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-30-1997
Reported in: 1997(4)ALLMR285
ORDERR.M. Lodha, J.1. The Petitioner National Building Construction Corporation Limited ('employer industry') seek to challenge the order dated 18th March, 1997 passed by the Industrial Court. The fate of this writ petition depends on the answer to the question whether in relation to the employer industry the Central Government is the 'appropriate Government' within the meaning of Section 2(a) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, 'I.D. Act') and if yes, the complaint filed by the employee was not maintainable and Industrial Court had no jurisdiction to entertain and try the complaint.2. The employee filed the complaint against the employer industry for the alleged unfair labour practices on the part of the employer under Item 9 of Schedule IV, of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short, 'MRTU and PULP Act') and it was prayed by the employee that the order dated 8th July, 1992 and the other orders passed by t...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra Ramkrishna Lande Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-30-1997
Reported in: II(1998)DMC706
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. Through this appeal, the appellant challenges the judgment and order dated 6.10.1990, passed by the Sessions Judge, Solapur, in Sessions Case No. 126 of 1990, whereby he has been convicted and sentenced in the manner stated hereinafter:(i) Under Section 498-A, I.P.C. to 3 years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to suffer R.I. for 3 months; and(ii) Under Section 306, I.P.C. to 5 years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to suffer R.I. for 3 months.Alongwith the appellant, were tried his father Ramkrishna, his mother Shalanbai, his maternal uncle Sharad and his maternal aunt Mangal, but they have been acquitted vide the impugned judgment.2. In short, the prosecution case runs as under :On 21.5.1989, the appellant was married to the deceased Archana. The evidence shows that whatever was settled in the marriage was given to him. 20 days after the marriage, Nagnath, Archana's father went to village Kurul where Archana was living after marriag...
Tag this Judgment!Vishamber Nath Puri Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-29-1997
Reported in: (1997)(96)ELT566Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal is filed by the importer challenging the impugned Order No. 1618/90-BLH, dated 26-10-1990 of the Respondent, praying for setting aside the same, which has denied the assessment on invoice value, depreciation from the date of invoice, rebate for damages, rebate for alloy wheels, not there, and other deemed relief.1. The facts of the case are that the appellant is an Indian Passport Holder and was working as Post Doctoral Associate in the Department of Medicinal Chemistry, College of Pharmacy, University of Florida from 24-2-1986 to 12-8-1988. He returned to India for permanent settlement and had brought his household and personal effects and a Mazda 323,1987 Model car against the Import Licence. Car was arbitrarily assessed by the Bombay Customs and the appellant paid duty and got it released. He challenged the assessment before Respondents by way of appeal contesting that the invoice value of the car should have been accepted for assessment, allowing proper depreciation...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »