Mumbai Court September 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.
John Joseph Khokar Vs. B.S. Bhadange and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-02-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)BomCR174; 1997(3)MhLj907
ORDERR.M. Lodha, J.1. The only question raised in the present writ petition and that needs consideration is: whether the petitioner John Joseph Khokar is a workman within the meaning of section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.2. The said question arises from the facts which briefly stated are: The petitioner was appointed in the Mazgaon Dock Limited, a company registered under the Companies Act having its factory at Dockyard Road, Mazgaon, Bombay --- 2nd Respondent on 10th April, 1968 as Fitter-Weapon in the Weapon and Electronic Department. On 1-2-1970 he was promoted as Weapon Mechanic Grade II. He was then promoted as highly skilled employee on 1-6-72. Further promotion was accorded to the petitioner on 2-12-1975 in Special Marine Grade and thereafter as Mistry on 1-6-1976. The next promotional post from Mistry is Charge hand and Petitioner alleges that one post of Charge hand fell vacant on 1-4-86. On 19-11-87 Shri K.D. Lodh, the 3rd respondent waspromoted on the post of ...
Farook Ali Khan S/O Ilyas Khan and Others Vs. Maharashtra State Electi ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-02-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALLMR9; 1998(2)BomCR566
ORDERN.P. Chapalgaonkar, J.1. These petitions challenge the order passed by the Returning Officer either rejecting the nomination paper of the petitioner or accepting the nomination paper of the respondent in Nanded Waghala Municipal Corporation elections, which are in process. Elections were declared by a Notification dated 18-8-1997. The scrutiny of nominations took place on 28-8-1997. Ten petitions challenge the rejection of the nomination paper of petitioner by the Returning Officer and one petition challenges acceptance of the nomination paper of respondent No. 5 in their petition, who is alleged to be defaulter and, therefore, disqualified. Since all these petitions raise common questions of law and facts, they are being disposed of by this common order.2. The nomination papers were rejected on either of the following grounds :(1) The petitioner was not qualified to be chosen being below the prescribed age of 21 years;(2) The original caste certificate showing the entitlement of ...
John Joseph Khokar Vs. Bhadange B. S. and Others.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-02-1997
Reported in: 1997(4)ALLMR584
ORDER1. The only question raised in the present writ petition and that needs consideration is : whether the Petitioner John Joseph Khokar is a workman within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.2. The said question arises from the facts which briefly stated are : The Petitioner was appointed in the Mazagaon Dock Limited, a company registered under the Companies Act having its factory at Dockyard Road, Mazagaon, Bombay - 2nd Respondent on April 10, 1968 as Fitter-Weapon in the Weapon and Electronics Department. On February 1, 1970 he was promoted as Weapon Mechanic Grade II. He was then promoted as highly skilled employee on June 1, 1972. Further promotion was accorded to the Petitioner on December 2, 1975 in Special Marine Grade and thereafter as Mistry on June 1, 1976. The next promotional post from Mistry is charge hand and Petitioner alleges that one post of charge hand fell vacant on April 1, 1986. On November 19, 1987 Shri K. D. Loh, the 3rd respondent...
Manik Bandu Gawali Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-02-1997
Reported in: 1998(5)BomCR777; 1998CriLJ2246; II(1998)DMC315; 1998(2)MhLj628
ORDERL. Manoharan, J.1. The accused in Sessions Case No. 112 of 1993 of the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Buldana is the appellant. He along with the second accused was charged for the offence punishable under section 307 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Judge acquitted the second accused and convicted the first accused-appellant under section 307, Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.500/- in default, to undergo R.I. for a further period of three months underline second part of section 307, I.P.C. The finding, conviction and sentence are under challenge in this appeal.2. P.W. 1 Saraswati was married to the first accused and in that relationship she begot a son who, on the date of occurrence, was about 3 years old and was residing with her. Accused was residing with P.W.1 and her family, but 3-4 months before the occurrence he started living away from her along with accused No. 2. On t...
Shri Ganapati Shankar Desai and Another Vs. Shri Rau Ganu Killedar and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-01-1997
Reported in: 1998(3)ALLMR348; 1998(2)BomCR684; 1997(3)MhLj899
ORDERS.S. Nijjar, J.1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed in Revision Application No. MRT. KP. 246 of 1981 by Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Kolhapur dated 3rd February, 1983, with a prayer that the same may be quashed and set aside and that the judgement and order passed in Tenancy Appeal No. 23 of 1976 passed by the Assistant Collector, Gadhinglaj Division, Gadhinglaj, dated 25th May, 1981 be restored.2. The petitioners are stated to be the tenants and the respondents the landlords of the suit land bearing Survey No. 7, admeasuring 2 acres and 23 gunthas of Village Palyachahuda in Bhudargad Tahsil of Kolhapur District. The Agricultural Land Tribunal started 32-G proceedings under the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (herein after called as 'the Act'). After recording the evidence, an order for fixation of purchase price in favour of the tenants was passed on 25th July, 1974. This order was set aside in appeal in view of the fact that certain la...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›