Mumbai Court July 1997 Judgments
Dagadu Shankar Todmal Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-28-1997
Reported in: 1998(5)BomCR150; I(1998)DMC517
ORDERR.G. Deshpande, J.1. This appeal is filed by the original accused No. 1 Dagadu Shankar Todmal, against the judgement and order, dated 5-1-1995, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar in Sessions Case No.345 of 1994, whereby, the learned Additional Sessions Judge found the appellant accused guilty of the offence punishable under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for nine months and further found him guilty for the offence punishable under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and he is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1 1/2 years. Along with the original accused No.1 present appellant, his mother Kausalyabai original accused No.2 was also tried for the offences referred to above, however, the learned Additi...
Tag this Judgment!Mahipati Krishna Karande and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-28-1997
Reported in: 1998BomCR(Cri)592
ORDERVishnu Sahai, J.1. By this appeal, the appellants have assailed the Judgement and order dated 25-1-1990 passed by the IIIrd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kolhapur, in Sessions Case No. 34 of 1988, convicting and sentencing each one of them, in the manner stated hereinafter:-i) All the appellants under section 304(2) r/w 34 I.P.C. to 2 years R.I. and topay a line of Rs. 200/- i.d, S.I. for 15 days, ii) Appellant Maruti Yeshwant Vaghamode under section 324 I.P.C. and R.I. for1 month and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- i.d. S.I. for 7 days.I may straight away mention that there is documentary evidence to indicate that the appellant No. 1 Mahipati Krishna Karande, is dead. Consequently, in view of the provisions contained in section 394 Cr.P.C. the appeal abates, in relation to him.2. In short, the prosecution case runs as under.The informant Akkatai, P.W. 2 is the wife of the deceased Yeshwant and mother of Sukhdeo P.W. 3. The deceased Yeshwant and the appellants were residents ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Pramilla Sanitary Products P.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-25-1997
Reported in: (1997)(96)ELT565Tri(Mum.)bai
1. In this appeal the department challenges the order passed by the Collector dated 31-10-1986 which deals with clubbing of the two clearances of two firms. The main facts are that the respondent Pramilla Sanitary Products P. Ltd. and Christine Horden India P. Ltd. are manufacturing certain consumer products. It is the case of the department that the production of these items by these two firms should be considered in such a way that the exemptions granted under Notification No. 77/85 should not be given to the respondent. No doubt both the units in question are separately legal entities, however it is stressed by the learned departmental representative that the working arrangements are such that the employees are employed in both the units i.e. the employees are interchangeable from one unit to another and he stresses this as the main argument. However I find from the order-in-original passed by the Collector nowhere there has been a finding regarding the financial flow from one unit...
Tag this Judgment!Kirloskar Pneumatic Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-25-1997
Reported in: 1999(105)ELT277(Bom)
A.A. Desai, J.1. The petitioner manufactures Drill Rods Penumatic Tools. In view of the Notification No. 164/83 duty was paid from time to time during the period from 1983 to 1985. Subsequently, it was realised that the duty payable is as per Notification No. 858-4-1991 (sic). They, therefore, filed the instant petition in 1987, principally, claiming the refund of the duty as paid. 2. In view of the decision laid down by the Supreme Court in case of Mafatlal Industries Ltd. v. Union of India - : 1997(89)ELT247(SC) , petition cannot be entertained as the claim was not preferred within the statutory period as envisaged by Section 27 of the Act. 3. Our attention is particularly invited to observation recorded in para 100 of the report of the judgment. The Supreme Court to mitigate the situation, owing to law as declared, observed that Petitioner who filed Writ Petition or suit is at liberty to present claim for refund within 60 days from the date of the judgment i.e., 19th December, 1996....
Tag this Judgment!Nirmal Udyog Co. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-24-1997
Reported in: (1998)65ITD73(Mum.)
1. All these appeals by the 20 appellants are against the penalty orders under s. 271(1)(c) and the facts, circumstances and grounds being the same; therefore, all these appeals of 20 appellants which is known as 'Jhunjhunwala Group of cases' are heard and decided by this common order.2. Before the start of the arguments, it was agreed to by the parties that the arguments, counter-arguments and the decisions may be with respect to the decision in the case of Nirmal Kumar P. Jhunjhunwala, in whose case, the loading order has been passed and that decision will govern all these appeals.3. The detailed facts, as are relevant to various submissions made by the parties, through, are mentioned at the relevant place, yet, we would like to extract a brief before we proceed to discuss and decide various solutions. The facts of the case are that as a result of search warrants and subsequent authorisations dt. 19th August, 1986 in the name of 4 individuals-(1) Purshottamdas F. Jhunjhunwala, (2) K...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Ranjana Vinodkumar Kejriwal Vs. Shri Vinod Kumar Kejriwal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-24-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Bom300; 1997(3)ALLMR633; 1998(1)BomCR268; II(1997)DMC523
ORDERT.K. Chandra Shekhara Das, J.1. Smt. Ranjana had filed the petition before the Family Court at Bandra for restitution of conjugal rights. According to her, the marriage between her and respondent was performed on 26-4-1987. The marriage was performed at Shree Ganganagar, Rajasthan. After marriage she came down to Bombay for permanently staying with the respondent. Then while they are in Bombay, she came to know that the respondent had already married, that marriage was subsisting and then petition was filed by him for divorce which is pending. This Jact according to applicant Ranjana was suppressed by the respondent from her and thereby he cheated her. With these allegations, she tiled the petition for restitution ot conjugal rights. She has also filed complaint before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 43rd Court at Borivali on 27-7-1991 bearing No. C.C. No. 22/W/91 against the respondent under sections 493, 495, 496, 420 and 114 etc. of I.PC. While her application for interim maintena...
Tag this Judgment!National Textiles Corpn. (S.M.) Ltd. Vs. Girdharisingh Pratapsingh and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-24-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)BomCR407; 1997(3)MhLj456
ORDERR.M. Lodha, J. 1. The petitioner, National Textile Corporation (S.M.) Ltd., in this writ petition, impugns the order dated 30th June, 1994 passed by 2nd Labour Court, Bombay whereby it directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 11,716/- to each of the respondents No. 1 to 16 in all a sum of Rs. 1,88,486/- within two months from the date of the order. 2. The respondents No. 1 to 16 (for short, 'workmen') made an application under section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, 'I.D. Act') before the Labour Court against the petitioner (for short, 'NIC') and one Mr. Madanlal M. Tatia, Managing Director, Shri Sitaram Mills Limited, claiming arrears of wages for the period from April, 1983 till 19th October, 1983 collectively amounting to Rs. 92,720/- the bonus @ 8.33% for the years 1980, 1981, 1982 collectively amounting to Rs. 41,943/-, and, the leave wages for 90 days @ 30 days leave per year for the years 1981, 1982 and 1983 collectively amounting to Rs. 41,943/-. Thus th...
Tag this Judgment!Bapusaheb Abdulsaheb Mutawali Vs. MohiddIn Gulam Dastagir Mumtaj and O ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-24-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)BomCR45; 1998(1)MhLj34
ORDERF.I. Rebello, J,1. This petition is directed against the order dated 15th July, 1995 whereby the Additional District Judge, Kolhapur in Civil Revision Application No. 5 of 1993 allowed the Revision Application and set aside the order of the IInd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kolhapur, dated 8th April 1993. The IInd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kolhapur, dated by his order had fixed the interim standard rent of the suit premises at Rs. 200/- per month. In appeal the Additional District Judge reversed the said finding and based on the Municipal records arrived at and fixed the figure of interim standard rent at Rs. 75/- per month.2. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the order of the Additional District Judge, Kolhapur is totally without jurisdiction in as much as the Additional District Judge could not have exercised the jurisdiction under section 29(3) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947. For that purpose the learned Counsel has ...
Tag this Judgment!ismail Shaikh Gulam Abbas Kothari and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-24-1997
Reported in: (1997)99BOMLR508
A.P. Shah, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to challenge the acquisition of a plot of land hearing Survey No. 82/1 plus 2313 admeasuring 30 1/4 gunthas situated at Taloja, Taluka, Panvel, District Raigad under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows: The land bearing Survey No. 82/1 plus 2313 which is the subject matter of this petition originally held by one Shri Tambat as a tenant who became the deemed purchaser under Section 32G of the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Act, 1948 by paying purchase price to his landlord. Sometime in 1967. N.A. permission was granted lo Shri Tambat by the Collector. Kolaba for residential user of the land. On 14th July. 1969. Shri Tambat entered into an agreement for sale with the petitioner in respect of the said land. It seems that the petitioner secured permission from the Industries Commissioner. Government of Maharashtra to ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Gujarat Alkalies and Chemicals
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-1997
Reported in: (1997)(96)ELT386Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These appeals involve the same issue whether the hydrogen gas is an eligible input for Modvat credit under Section 57A used in the manufacture respondents' final product which is sodium cyanide. The jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner has denied modvat credit of hydrogen gas for the reason that it is not directly used as an input/component part in the manufacture of sodium cyanide but is used first in hydrogen gas at the intermediate stage which in turn is used in the final product and that therefore, it cannot be considered as an input used in or in relation to the manufacture of the final product.It was also held that it was not consumed in the final product but is simply used for conveying gas as well as cooling gas. This order of the Assistant Commissioner was set aside by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Ahmedabad in the impugned order. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that it is not essential that an input should be used directly in the main process of manufactu...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »