Mumbai Court November 1998 Judgments
Girish K. Shah Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1998
Reported in: (1999)(106)ELT495Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant is aggrieved by the penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs imposed on him in the impugned order by the Collector of Customs, Mumbai under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962.2. The facts; briefly are that on 1-3-1989 M/s. S.K. Gems and M/s.Hemant Exports, Bombay presented one consignment each declared to contain cut and polished diamonds to the Jewellery Appraiser of the Postal Appraising Section of the Custom House, Bombay for assessment for the purpose of export to Hong Kong by post parcel. The consignment sought to be exported in the name of S.K. Gems under invoice dated 28-2-1989 was declared to be two lots of cut and polished diamonds totally weighing 417 carats or a declared value of US $. 1,82,960/- or Rs. 27,64,000/-. Similarly the other consignment by the exporter in the name of Hemant Exports had an invoice dated 28-2-1989 declared to contain one lot of 439 carats of cut and polished diamonds valued at Rs. 28,65,000/-. The parcels said to contain cut and polished diamonds...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. A.S. Abraham and Another Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1998
Reported in: 1999(5)BomCR117; 1999BomCR(Cri)117; (1999)1BOMLR644; 1999(1)MhLj368
ORDERD.G. Deshpande, J.1. Petition is filed challenging the Order of the JMFC, Kalyan, rejecting the application of the petitioners-accused for discharge from offence under section 2 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honours Act, 1971. The prosecution was launched by the State against the petitioners accused on the ground that they insulted the national flag by not holding any function or celebration on 1-5-1994, which was a Maharashtra Day. Sufficient time was granted to the A.P.P. to produce any notification by which holding of Maharashtra Day function by school was made obligatory by the State Government. She could not produce any notification. On the face of it the order of the Magistrate is unsustainable because not holding Maharashtra Day function and not hoisting the flag on that day cannot bring the matter within the purview of section 2 of the aforesaid Act.2. It may be that the petitioners accused were liable to hold the function as per the circulars issued by the Gove...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Ancient Investment Pvt. Ltd. and Others Vs. Kotak Securities and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)ALLMR538; 1999(5)BomCR107; 1999BomCR(Cri)107
ORDERD.G. Deshpande, J.1. Heard Mr. Khandeparkar for the petitioner and Mr. Amit Desai for the respondent No. 1 complainant. Petitioners before this Court are accused Nos. 6, 7 and 8 in the complaint filed by the respondent No. 1 complainant under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. From the allegations in the complaint and the very submissions of the Advocate for the complainant, it is clear that the liability in this case of the debt was of accused No. 6 which is a company and accused Nos. 7 and 8 who were the Directors of the accused No. 6. The cheque in question was issued as alleged by the complainant by accused No. 1 which is a company and was signed by accused No. 2 as Director of the Company. The question that is raised by the petitioners in this case is whether accused Nos. 6, 7 and 8 who are the petitioners before this Court could be prosecuted by the complainant in view of the provisions of section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.2. On the other hand it was ...
Tag this Judgment!Kazi Syed SaifuddIn Vs. Kasturchand Abhayrajji Golchha
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)ALLMR113; 2000(4)BomCR582; 1999(2)MhLj675
ORDERN.J. Pandya, J.1. At the admission stage of this appeal, a preliminary point was taken, whether the appeal is maintainable before the High Court or before the District Court. In order to appreciate this contraversy, some facts are required to be noted.2. The respondent/plaintiff is a landlord, after obtaining permission from the Rent Controller under Clause 13 of the C.P. and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949, had issued the quit notice on or about 9-1-1974. As the defendant/appellant did not comply with the same, a suit came to be filed which resulted into decree for possession with a direction for mesne profits.3. In the suit itself, by way of the arrears of rent and for mesne profits, definite prayer was made and it was valued at Rs. 3,490/-. The details and the break up thereof arc to be found in para 3 of the judgment under which the learned Judges of the Division Bench of this Court directed that the matter be placed before the learned Chief Justice for re...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Mohd. Sakir Itbari Ansari Vs. Shri L.S. Danekar, Special Executiv ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1998
Reported in: (1999)101BOMLR566
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule.Respondent waives service. By consent Rule made returnable and heard forthwith.2. The Petitioner in the present case has challenged a part of the show cause notice dated 10th October, 1998 wherein the Petitioner has been called upon to furnish two sureties of respectable people from the locality. The further condition imposed is that the sureties must be well educated citizens, one practicing the Hindu faith and the other Muslim. The third condition is that the sureties must be from the same locality and the fourth that they are well educated.It is the contention of the Petitioner that the order of the Special Executive Magistrate imposing conditions calling on the Petitioner to furnish sureties of well educated persons, one practicing the Hindu faith and the other Muslim is not sustainable. Such an order it is pointed out would be contrary to and in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Article 21 sets out that no person shall be deprive...
Tag this Judgment!Anuja Laboratories Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-27-1998
Reported in: (1999)(105)ELT356Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The above appeals have been taken up for consideration with the consent of both the parties after waiving the pre-deposit.2. These are appeals filed by job workers who manufacture ayurvedic medicaments. Some of the goods they manufacture are Ultra slim fast, Love care, Kvex gold. They obtain orders from loan licensee M/s. K.V.Health Care Products Pvt. Ltd. M/s. K.V. Health Care Products Pvt. Ltd. placed orders to produce the above items. They also supplied raw-materials. A price list was filed by the appellant giving price at which the goods were sold by M/s. K.V. Health Care Products Pvt. Ltd. Duty was paid at the rate of 10% of the value. Show cause notices were issued and the Asstt. Commissioner confirmed the demands at an higher value that is the value on which the goods were sold by M/s. K.V.Health Care Products Pvt. Ltd. Appeals were filed before the Collector (Appeals), Mumbai who by the impugned order rejected the contentions of the appellant. Hence, the present 4 appeals.3...
Tag this Judgment!JatIn Jhaveri Vs. Commissioner of Customs Airport
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-27-1998
Reported in: (1999)(107)ELT527Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The facts leading to this appeal are as follows : Ajit K. Dodia (appellant in appeal C/576/95) reported to Customs at Sahar Airport on the night of 27/28-7-1993 intending to board a flight to Hong Kong. On suspicion, the Customs officers searched a grey suit case and black briefcase which he had checked in. The suitcase contained U.S. $ totalling 2,89,250/-. The brief case contained U.S. $ 1,14,300/-.Currency was seized and Ajit Dodia questioned. He said that he was to accompany Jatin Jhaveri, a diamond trader to Hong Kong. He knew Jatin Jhaveri because his (Ajit's) brother Jitendra K. Dodia as working with Jatin Jhaveri as a Sorter. Jatin Jhaveri had arranged and finalised his trip including the fare and expenses for stay. He and Jatin Jhaveri drove to the airport in his car and after dropping him in the airport departure hall, Jhaveri left him.2. Jitendra Dodia confirmed to the Customs officers that he was working with Jatin Jhaveri; that he and Jatin Jhaveri packed the U.S. doll...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Pushpa Prithviraj Sardesai, Alias Pushpa Sadashiv Desai Vs. the S ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-27-1998
Reported in: 2000(1)BomCR429; 1999(3)MhLj960
ORDERJ.A. Patil, J.1. The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in Shri Shantadurga High School, Bicholim on 1-7-1971. At the time of her appointment, the petitioner's qualifications were S.S.C. and H.S.S. (Hindi Shikshak Sanad). According to the petitioner, H.S.S. is a recognized qualification for teachers. In the course of her service, the petitioner passed B.A. Examination of Shivaji University, Kolhapur in April, 1993. It is the petitioner's case that she thus became a trained graduate teacher and was thus eligible for being promoted as a trained Graduate Teacher. 2. On 1-10-1993, a vacancy in the post of Asst. Teacher occurred in the said school on account of retirement of one Asst. Teacher. K. J. Thomas. The petitioner being eligible for being appointed to the said post, the school Authorities recommended her name to respondent No. 2 i.e. the Director of Education for promotion. However, respondent No. 2 by his letter dated 7-12-1993 informed the School Authorities tha...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Binani Zinc Fibre and Another Vs. Shri Pandurang Harischandra Tor ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-27-1998
Reported in: 2000(1)BomCR443; 1999(3)MhLj973
ORDERR.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR, J.1. This Revision Application arises from order dated 26th June, 1998 passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 2/96/A by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bicholim. By the impugned Order, the trial Court has answered the following issue in negative:-'Whether the defendant No. 1, 2 and 3 prove that this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present suit as the working of 110 KV S.C. Tower line is being done under Electricity Act, 1910 and Indian Telegraphic Act, 1885 under which only the District Magistrate i.e. the Collector, North Goa has jurisdiction.'2. The facts in brief relevant for the decision are that the respondent No. 1 herein has filed a suit seeking to restrain the petitioners and the respondents No. 2 to 4 from 'taking proposed supply of electricity and/or from carrying any work in that regard to the suit property belonging to respondent No. 1'. The contention of the respondent No. 1 is that the petitioners and the other respondents proposed...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Perpetua E. Rodrigues Fernandes Vs. the Goa Public Service Commis ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-27-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)BomCR817; 1999(3)MhLj291
ORDERR.K. Batta, J.1. The petitioner was appointed on purely temporary basis on the recommendation of the Departmental Selection Committee to the post of Lower Division Clerk vide order dated 22nd April, 1991. The appointment was made subject to Memorandum dated 21st March, 1991, which inter alia provides that the terms of appointment include the condition that the appointment is temporary and will not confer any title to permanent employment and that the appointment may be terminated by giving one month's notice on either side, without assigning any reasons and the Appointing Authority may terminate the services forthwith by tendering notice pay. By intimation dated 3rd June, 1991, the petitioner was posted for invigilation duty on 30th June, 1991. The petitioner had to report at 2.00 p.m. but she reported at 2.32 p.m., the petitioner instead of giving the answer papers to a candidate supplied a bunch of supplements to the candidate which resulted in confusion over the identity of the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »