Mumbai Court April 1998 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.
Daulatrao Nanasaheb Pisal Vs. Bhuinj Police Station and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-18-1998
Reported in: (1998)100BOMLR167
S.S. Nijjar, J.1. In this case a complaint has been lodged by one Mrs. Ashatai Jayawant Parte to the effect that the applicant has tried to outrage her modesty. It is alleged that she belongs to Scheduled Caste, The applicant is liable to be proceeded against for having committed offences under Sections 354, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(1) and (xi) and Section 3(ix) of the S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter 'the Act').2. The applicant is stated to be a journalist. Due to his investigations, one Dr. Kadam and his wife who were running a ring of vice came to be arrested. Husband and wife were not able to get bail for a considerable period of time. It is submitted by Mr. Thorat, learned Counsel appearing for the applicant, that as a result Dr. Kadam became inimical towards the applicant. He further submits it is at his behest that the complaint has been filed by Mrs. Parte. She is alleged to have been married to a Hindu-Maratha many y...
Chalthan Vighag Khand Udyog Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-17-1998
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT874Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal filed against the decision of Collector (Appeals) passed on 4-12-1991 made in Order-in Appeal No. KVV-385/91 BRD, dated 4-12-1991 whereunder he dismissed the appeal of the appellants. The appellant is a manufacturer of sugar falling under Chapter 17. The appellant had constructed pucca tanks for storage of molasses. During the course of production of sugar and molasses it appears sometimes the appellant produced extra molasses for which pucca tanks could not be provided. Hence they stored such molasses in katcha pit on execution of proper bond. In this case, it would appear they have obtained a certificate from the State Authorities as to evidence of fitness of human consumption as is revealed by its certificate dated 29-8-1988.The appellants submitted application for destruction of molasses by their letter dated 10-2-1989 which was rejected by the Department by its letter dated 14-2-1989. In the said letter dated 14-2-1989, it was informed by the Supdt. that the ...
M/S. Kec International Ltd. Vs. Kamani Employees Union and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-17-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)ALLMR259; 1998(3)BomCR590
ORDERF.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule in all petitions. Respondents waive service. By consent heard forthwith.Writ Petition No. 1761 of 1997 is preferred by the company against the order dated 25th September, 1997 passed by the Industrial Court, Mumbai. The company has been restrained temporarily to act on the V.R.S. application or to refuse to allot work and to pay wages to enlisted workers till further orders with a further direction that the 55 (fifty-five) enlisted employees be allowed to work and be paid wages subject to deposit of their cheques with the respondent company.Writ Petition No. 1917 of 1997 has been preferred by the Union claiming to represent the workers employed by the company, being the only trade union of employees of the petitioner company. The reliefs in the petition amongst others are to restrain the company from acting on the V.R.S. announced by notice dated 8th August, 1997; restrain the company from selling, disposing or in any manner alienating the plant, machinery,...
Bhagwan Raoji Dale Vs. Sushma Alias Nanda Bhagwan Dale
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-17-1998
Reported in: 1999(5)BomCR851; I(1999)DMC168
ORDERA.V. Savant, J.1. Heard all the learned Counsel : Mr. S.V. Kotwal for the petitioner-husband : Miss. Smita Mane for respondent No. 1 wife and Mr. D.N. Salvi, A.P.P. for respondents No. 2 State.2. This petition has been placed before us pursuant to the order passed by learned Chief Justice as a result of the order dated 19th April, 1995 passed by G.R. Majithia, J., since the learned Judge thought that the view taken by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Sharadchandra Satbhai v. Indubai Satbhai 1978 M.L.J. 123 required reconsideration in view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Bai Tahira v. Ali Hussian Fissalli Chothia, : 1979CriLJ151 . Majithia, J., observed that the question as to whether a divorced wife has a right to claim maintenance under section 125(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was important. He, therefore, directed the office to place the matter before the learned Chief Justice. Consequently, the matter has been placed before us for f...
The State of Maharashtra Vs. Babu @ Babusya Vithal Rathod and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-17-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)BomCR863
ORDERVishnu Sahai, J.1. Since both the matters arise out of the same set of facts and a common judgment we are disposing them off together.2. Vide judgment and order dated 11th December, 1996, passed in Sessions Case No. 46 of 1996, the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli, convicted and sentenced the appellants of Criminal Appeal No. 92 of 1997, in the manner stated hereinafter:(i) Babu @ Babusya Vithal Rathod, Gulab @ Gulya Abbas Bhosale and Kamalakar Abdul Pawar under section 396 I.P.C. to death; (ii) Kamalakar Abdul Pawar under section 302 I.P.C. to death. (iii) Babu @ Babusya Vithal Rathod, Gulab alias Gulya Abbas Bhosale and Kamalakar Abdul Pawar under section 397 I.P.C. to 5 years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each, in default to suffer R.I. for a period of 1 year. (iv) Kamalakar Abdul Pawar under section 392 I.P.C. to 3 years R.I. (v) Mahesh Nagnath Gaikwad, under sections 396, 397 and 392 I.P.C. to 10 years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo R.I....
Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation Employees' Association ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-17-1998
Reported in: [1998(89)FLR986]; (2000)IIILLJ595Bom
D.K. Trivedi, J.1. The appellants Maharashtra Industrial Corporation Employees' Association has filed this appeal as provided under Section 11 of the Trade Unions Act, 1926 challenging the order passed by the Additional Registrar of Trade Unions, Bombay Dist. dated August 10, 1983 gazetted on August 9, 1984 on the ground that the order of cancellation of registration dated August 10, 1983 is passed by the authority under Sub-section (b) of Section 10 of Trade Unions Act, 1926, wherein the authority has cancelled the registration of 51 Trade Unions including the present appellant who is at serial No. 51 on the ground that the concerned Unions have wilfully and after due notice from the Registrar, continued to contravene the provisions of Section 28 of the Trade Unions Act, 1926 and Rule 17 of the Bombay Trade Unions Regulations 1927 and failed to send the Registrar all prescribed data, the annual general statement of accounts in the annual return form no. 1 for the year ending December ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Nagpur Engineering Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-17-1998
Reported in: [2000]245ITR806(Bom)
1. In view of the decision of this court in CIT v. Paramount Premises (P.) Ltd. : [1991]190ITR259(Bom) rejected......
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Ballarpur Industries Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-16-1998
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT972Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These are two appeals filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur against two orders of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Indore captioned above.2. We have heard Shri K.L. Ramteke, the ld. DR and Shri G.L. Deshpande, the learned Counsel for the respondents. The issue in these two appeals relates to eligibility to Modvat credit of Coated Metal Anodes which are used in the manufacture of Caustic Soda through the process on electrolysis. The Assistant Commissioner denied Modvat credit considering these as merely equipments and therefore excluded from the Explanation under Rule 57A of Central Excise Rules for Modvat credit which defines input. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal against the Assistant Commissioner's order. We further find that the matter stands settled by the Tribunal decision in the case of Collector v. Standard Alkali -1992 (59) E.L.T. 127 (Tribunal) where the Tribunal has held Graphite Anodes and Titanium Anodes used for electrolytic man...
Premier Automobiles Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-16-1998
Reported in: (1998)(62)ECC76
1. The above mentioned appeals are directed against the captioned order of the Commissioner of Cen. Excise (Adjudication), Mumbai.2. The appellants are manufacturing motor vehicles. Show cause notices were issued to them proposing to add interest earned on deposits received from customers for booking of the cars manufactured by them in the assessable value of the cars under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Three show cause notices were issued--first one dated 4.10.90 for the period 1.7.84 to 30.6.86 demanding duty of Rs. 29,80,888/-; second show cause notice dated 24.7.92 for the period 1.7.86 to 30.6.91 demanding duty of Rs. 6,24,19,000/-; the third show cause notice dated 13.10.93 in which Rs. 36,55,390/-was demanded as duty for the period 1.7.91 to 31.3.92. The Commissioner, after considering their defence observed that the department has not shown any nexus between the whole sale price and the interest earned on the advance so as to affect the price charged. But at the s...
Mangla Products Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-16-1998
Reported in: (1998)(77)LC274Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The above appeals arise out of the order passed by the Additional Collector of Customs, Bombay and hence both the appeals were heard together and disposed of by this common order.2. The brief facts of the case are that M/s. Mangla Products imported a consignment said to contain a quantity of 34.938. MTs of brass dross under Bill of Entry dated 24.11.1984. Acting upon intelligence received by the SUB that scrap was being imported into India in the guise of dross, the Bill of Entry was taken up for investigations and the goods were examined under the supervision of SUB. On examination of 10% of the consignment the goods were reported to contain genuine brass dross.Samples were forwarded for inspection and the entire consignment was examined and found to consist of: It was also noticed that one of the varieties of brass dross was mixed with saw dust. The import of brass dross was permissible under OGL Appendix 6, Item 2 of Part-Ill of AM 85 Policy whereas import of brass powder and br...