Mumbai Court March 1998 Judgments

Singhal Swaroop Ispat Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1998)LC137Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Arguing on the Miscellaneous Application the ld. Counsel Shri S.N.Kantawala submitted that the Tribunal order directing the applicants to make deposit of Rs. 20 lacs out of the duty against them and Rs. 2 lacs out of the penalty has been received by them only on 17-1-1998.However, meanwhile the Department has taken recovery action and have detained excisable goods notwithstanding the stay order of the Tribunal. The ld. Counsel also pleaded for modification of the terms of the stay order as regards the pre-deposit and the referred to their application before the BIFR for being registered for declaration as a sick unit under the Sick Industrial Companies Act, 1985. The ld.Counsel submitted that there are Judicial decisions to the effect that in such circumstances pre-deposit may be waived. The ld. Counsel further referred to their profit and loss accounts period ended 30-6-1997 showing that they have incurred nearly 40 crores loss. The applicants are however, prepared to reverse in M...

S.T. Texturisers Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1999)(113)ELT599Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Application is for waiver of deposit amount of Rs. 14.20 lakhs demanded on the ground that the applicant took credit on the basis of invoice which was issued to M/s. Ayub Silk Factory and endorsed by that factory to applicant.2. After hearing both sides we find prima facie two streams of decisions on the issue as to whether credit would be taken on endorsed invoices, decisions such as Krishna Cold Rolled Sections v. C.C.E. - 1996 (88) E.L.T. 98 holding one view; Jenny Plywood Industries Ltd. v.C.C.E. -1997 (96) E.L.T. 606 holding the contrary. The benefit prima facie must go to the assessee. We therefore order that the applicant securing revenue to the extent of Rs. 1.5 lakhs either to deposit or by keeping appropriate balance in the RG 23 within six weeks, it need not deposit the remaining amount and the recovery for stay....

JaIn Rice Mills Through Jagdish Vs. Punjab and Sind Bank and ors.

Court: DRAT Mumbai

1. Legality of the confirmation of the sale held by auction on 8.3.1997 is called in question in this appeal preferred by judgment-debtor (J.D.). The decree-holder Bank (D.H.B.) had obtained two decrees against the J.D. in Suit Nos. 542/85 and 14/86 from Jullandhar Court for Rs. 8,52,580.72 and Rs. 36,85,788.34 on 13.9.1985 and 27.9.1986 respectively. The decree in Suit No. 14/86 was directed to be executed by the sale of the mortgaged property.3. Both the decrees were put for execution. When the Bank could not execute the decrees in the normal course, the execution was sought by arrest and detention of the J.D. Jagdish Jain in civil prison.Accordingly the J.D. was arrested on or about 8.8.1994. In civil revision bearing No. 3160/94 preferred by J.D. in High Court he was directed to be released on bail. The execution proceedings which were pending in the Civil Court were then transferred to Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur under the provisions of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Fina...

M/S. Reshma Constructions Vs. State of Goa

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1998(3)BomCR837; 1999(1)MhLj462

ORDERR.M.S Khandeparkar, J.1. The question which arises for determination in the present petition is about the applicability of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter called as 'the new Act') to the arbitration proceedings commenced under the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter called as 'the old Act') and which were pending for disposal at the time when the new Act came into force.2. The facts, in brief relevant for the decision are that the petitioner was awarded with the work of Construction of Canal Head Regulator of Chapoli Minor Irrigation Tank at Canacona and the agreement between the parties in respect thereof provided that in case of dispute between the parties, the same to be settled by way of arbitration. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent failed to settle the dues which were claimed by the petitioner by its letter dated 15-8-93 and, therefore, the petitioner invoked the arbitration clause in the said agreement by a letter dated 8-2-94 and s...

Shri Shaikh ChiraguiddIn Vs. Shri Krishna Bablo Gaonkar and Others

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1998(5)BomCR707

ORDERR.K. Batta, J. 1. The appellant (plaintiff in the suit and hereinafter referred as plaintiff) had filed a suit for permanent injunction seeking to restrain the defendants/respondents (defendants in the suit and hereinafter referred as defendants) from interfering in the possession of the plaintiff in respect of the suit paddy fields surveyed under Nos. 15/7, 17/1 and 14/5 situated at Ambelim, Sattari, Goa. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, is that the said paddy fields were granted to one Arjun Yesso Gaonkar on or about 2-10-1899 by Alvara No, 199 as a provisional grant of aforementioned by the then erstwhile Portuguese Government and upon his death the said Arjun Yesso Gaonkar had transferred the said grant in favour of his daughter Kashi Mahadev Siddhikarin and that thereafter, the said Kashi Mahadev Siddhikarin and her son Shankar Mahadev Siddikar by agreement of sale dated 8-8-1962 transferred all their rights and possession in the suit paddy fields in favour of the plainti...

Mannubhai Vadilal Shah Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1998(5)BomCR898

ORDERS.S. Parkar, J. 1. Heard Mr. Paranjape for respondent Nos. 3 and 4. This contempt petition has been taken out by the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2384 of 1996 alleging non-compliance of the interim order dated 19th July, 1996, passed in the aforesaid petition by a Division Bench of this Court. The earlier petition was filed for directions against the respondents for supplying water connection to the buildings in Sheetal Nagar in Mira Road Bhayander in Dist, Thane. At the time of admission this Court had issued interim directions directing the respondents to supply the water connections to the buildings in question about which grievance was made in the aforesaid writ petition notwithstanding the fact that the buildings had not been given completion certificate on the ground that the buildings were constructed unauthorisedly. 2. Present contempt petition has been filed alleging that inspite of the aforesaid order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the aforesaid petitio...

Klockner Windsor India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus., Acc

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT953Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 8-8-1991 passed by the Addl. Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex, Mumbai confiscating the goods imported by the appellants with an option to redeem the goods on payment of fine of Rs. 25,000/-; enhancing the value of goods from US $ 201 per unit to US $ 295 per unit and imposing penalty of Rs. 15,000/- under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962.2. The appellant imported 30 numbers of counter balance valve for manufacture of plastic injection moulding machines. Bill of entry dated 7-6-1991 and other import documents were filed declaring the value as US $ 201.20 per unit. On the basis of earlier import of identical goods by the appellant in October, 1990 at US $ 295 per unit, the Addl.Commissioner found misdeclaration of value and passed the impugned order. This order is now challenged.2. Shri R.R. Sanzgiry, representative of the appellant submitted that the appellant is a leading manufacturer of plastic injection moulding machin...

Ashalata Sadashiv Mahajan Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1998(4)ALLMR656; 1998(3)BomCR693

ORDERN.P. Chapalgaonker, J.1. Heard Shri N.H. Patil, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri V.D. Sapkal, learned A.G.R, for the State.2. Petitioner wanted to contest the election of the President of the MunicipalCouncil, Erandol which took place on 11-12-1997. The office of the President wasreserved for Other Backward Class woman. The petitioner, though allegedly belongingto the Other Back Ward Class, was elected from a seat reserved for woman general. Onthat count, her nomination paper was rejected. Petitioner did not the an appeal as wascontemplated under sub-section (3) of section 51 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils,Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 nor she presented any disputebefore the State Government under sub-section (5) of section 51 of the said Act3. Shri Patil, learned Counsel for the petitioner, contended that the provision of appeal made in sub-section (3-A) of section 51 is redundant inasmuch as it is not possible for anybody to avail this fac...

Shri Shrikant A. Bicholkar and Others Vs. State of Goa by Its Chief Se ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1998(3)ALLMR679; 1998(3)BomCR740; [1999(81)FLR545]

ORDERR.K. Batta, J.1. The petitioners were appointed as Health Assistants in the Directorate of Health Services and are working in the Filaria Control Unit Programme. Initially there were three categories of employees, namely, Laboratory Technician in the pay scale of Rs. 1200-2040, Laboratory Assistant in the pay scale of Rs. 975-1540 and Health Assistant in the pay scale of Rs. 950-1500. The Government of Goa found that the duties and responsibilities of Laboratory Technician/Laboratory Assistant were same and since their eligibility requirement for educational qualifications also did not differ for the said posts, there was no case for disparity in their pay scales. Therefore, vide Order bearing No. 13/207/87-1/P.H.D. dated 19th January, 1988, the pay scale of Laboratory Assistants was brought at par with that of Laboratory Technician and it was revised to Rs. 1200-2040. The petitioners in this petition claim that the eligibility requirement insofar as educational qualification is c...

Rageshree R. Samant Vs. Secretary, Sharadashram Vidya Mandir and Other ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1998(3)ALLMR728; 1998(5)BomCR579; (1998)2BOMLR197

ORDERD.K.Trivedi, J. 1. The petitioner has moved this Court praying for taking steps against the respondents under the Contempt of Courts Act. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent-authority, inspite of the order passed by the School Tribunal, Bombay dated 18th December, 1996, in Appeal No. 50 of 1994, has not paid the salary as per the scale. I have perused the order of the school Tribunal dated 11th December, 1996 passed in Appeal No. Bom. 50 of 1994 wherein the School Tribunal allowed the appeal of the present petitioner and the order of termination dated 25th March, 1993 was quashed and set aside. While allowing the appeal, the Tribunal has granted the relief in favour of the petitioner-appellant alongwith reinstatement to her original post as part time Assistant Music Teacher in the respondent's School and the respondent's school was directed to reinstate the appellant to the said post. In respect of pay and allowances, it is directed by the order of the Tribunal th...