Mumbai Court July 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.
State of Maharashtra Vs. Mesu Dhondiba Vidhate
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-24-1998
Reported in: I(1999)DMC724
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. Through this appeal, the State of Maharashtra (Appellant) challenges the judgment and order dated 30.11.1984, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, in Sessions Case No. 129 of 1984, acquitting the respondent for an offence punishable under Section 302, IPC.2. In short, the prosecution case is that the deceased Shashikala, daughter of Dagadu Anyaba Kamble PW 1, was married to the respondent about 9 to 10 months prior to the incident. After marriage, she stayed for a couple of months at the house of the respondent situated in Indira Nagar Zopadpatti Pune-Alandi Road, Pune. During Diwali, she came to the house of her father. After Diwali, her father sent through her some clothes to the respondent. The respondent came to him and threw those clothes. Shashikala expected that the respondent would beat her. Consequently, Dagadu Kamble brought her to his place at Khed. After she was with him for a week there, the respondent along with his father Dhondiba came and bo...
Shankar Mahia Andher Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Through the Union Terri ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-24-1998
Reported in: (1998)100BOMLR41
Shafi Parkar, J.1. The appellant convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment by the judgment and order dated 12th August, 1994 delivered by the learned Sessions Judge, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Silvassa, in Sessions Case No. 9 of 1993, has preferred this appeal impugning his conviction and sentence.2. Originally, there were four accused who are interrelated. The accused No. 2 is the son of the accused No. 4 and the accused Nos. 1 and 3 are husband and wife. Accused No. 1 is the first cousin of accused No. 2 and nephew of accused No. 4. The date of the incident is 28.6.1993 when one Lallu Maria Andher, son of accused No. 4 and brother of accused No. 2, was murdered. Deceased Lallu was thus the first cousin of the appellant. The appellant (original accused No. 1) was charged for the offence of murder of deceased Lallu under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The remaining accused, being accused Nos. 2, 3 and 4 were charged for offence under Se...
Demosha Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-1998
Reported in: (1999)(113)ELT200Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The application is for dispensing with pre-deposit of Rs. 1,86,663/-.2. The learned Counsel Shri J.C. Patel appearing for the applicant submitted that they manufacture Sodium Hydrosulphite acid and other chemicals falling under Chapter 28 of the Central Excise Tariff Act.They use duty paid oleum which is concentrated sulphuric acid in the dehydration. Thus diluted spent sulphuric acid emerges along with diluted acid which can be used for manufacture of other products. There was a Trade Notice No. 171/88, dated 12-9-1988 issued by the Central Excise Commissioner, Vadodara informing that Spent Sulphuric Acid is not a manufactured product. The Department however, issued show-cause notice proposing to recover duty on this Spent Sulphuric Acid under Heading 28.07. The learned Counsel submitted that the appellants had acted bona fidely and declared the Spent Sulphuric Acid in their classification list as not an excisable product. The endorsement on the classification list by the authorit...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Anil Metal Fabricators
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-1998
Reported in: (1998)(104)ELT566Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal filed by the department against the impugned order whereunder the Addl. Commissioner had held that the tank fabricated and mounted on chasis would be classifiable under Heading 8707 and he also dropped the show cause notice.2. The respondents are engaged in the fabrication of tanks mounted on vehicle chasis. A show cause notice was issued on 5-2-1988 demanding duty of Rs. 1,72,000/- for the period 1-3-1986 to 30-8-1987. In the notice it is alleged that the respondents were manufacturing tanks and fitting them on motor vehicle chasis in their premises and clearing finished goods either in fully assembled condition or in knock-down condition. Therefore, it should be treated as coming under Chapter Heading 8704. The adjudicating authority by the impugned order had held that on the basis of the Explanatory Notes it cannot come under Heading 8704. He sought to follow the judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Darshan Singh Pavittar Singh Moga v....
Nimba Rajaram Mali Vs. Collector, Jalgaon and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)ALLMR479; 1999(1)BomCR546
ORDERB.H. Marlapalle, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for respective parties. The Village Panchayat Shrisoli Pr. Nashirabad, tq. & Dist. Jalgaon has 13 elected members and the petitioner came to be elected as Sarpanch. A Notice of No Confidence Motion was issued by 7 members of the said Village Panchayat on 2nd April, 1998 against the petitioner and submitted to the Tahsildar who convened a Special Meeting for the purpose of discussion regarding the said Notice on 27th April, 1998. In the said meeting, 11 out of the 13 elected members were present. The Motion of No Confidence came to be passed by majority of 7 v. 4. A dispute filed under section 35(3-B) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958 came to be dismissed by the Additional Collector, Jalgaon. The said dispute was registered as dispute No. 37/98. Appeal No. 49/98 filed under section 53(3-C) before the Divisional Commissioner, Nasik Division, Nasik, against the order passed by the Additional Collector on 25-5-1998, also came to ...
Janardhan S/O Punjaji Kanke Vs. Asaram S/O Waman Kale
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)BomCR772
ORDERA.B. Palkar, J.1. This Revision Petition is filed by original defendant against an order condoning delay of 453 days by the Appellate Court. The respondent had filed a suit in the forma pauperis in the trial Court. That suit was dismissed and against the decree of dismissal he filed an appeal to the District Court.2. Admittedly, an appeal was filed after delay of 453 days. There was no application for condonation of delay as appeal was beyond time. Prior to that, no application was moved for permission to file an appeal in the forma pauperis.3. The learned Additional District Judge, Jalna, by an order dated 13-10-1997 condoned the delay of 453 days.4. It is clear from the order of the learned District Judge that evidence was recorded for the purpose of delay condonation and evidence clearly was against the respondent. The learned Additional District Judge observed in his order that, there is absolutely no reference in his evidence before theCourt regarding his sickness during the ...
Dr. Abdul Khadar Khan Vs. Shri Javed Siraj Quazi and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)ALLMR341; 1999(2)BomCR304
ORDERA.B. Palkar, J.1. This revision application is filed by original plaintiff in Special Civil Suit No. 62/1991, on the file of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon, against an order passed on 3-1-1998 on Exhibit 23.2. Petitioner/plaintiff is medical practitioner at Bhusawal and since the year of 1990 he is doing private practice. Defendant is related to plaintiff and plaintiff's sister had filed a complaint against her husband under section 498-A of the I.P.C. wherein, respondent /defendant is also an accused. It appears that due to this, respondent was having grudge against the petitioner and he filed false complaint to the Income Tax Department against petitioner. In pursuance of that complaint, Income Tax authorities conducted an enquiry and ultimately came to the conclusion that, there was nothing against petitioner that is to say the complaints filed to the Income Tax Department against the petitioner/plaintiff were without any substance.3. Thereafter petitioner fi...
Anant Govindrao Saraf Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)ALLMR479; 1999(4)BomCR195
ORDERA.D. Mane, J.1. The petitioner is the adopted son of freedom fighter Shri Govindrao Saraf who died on 3-2-1987. After his death his wife Vatsalabai was getting pension of freedom fighter. The petitioner submits that as there was no issue to his adoptive parents he was adopted as their son on 19-8-1988. The mother of the petitioner died on 23-8-1992. The petitioner submits that as the adopted son the petitioner applied for certificate of nomination of freedom fighter but his application was not decided and therefore, this writ petition is filed for appropriate directions to the respondents to issue certificate of nomination of freedom fighter.2. Reply is filed on behalf of the respondent No. 1. It has been stated that since there is no provision for nomination in favour of an adopted son the application made by the petitioner on 8-8-1994 was rejected. In this context, reliance is placed on the decision of the High Power Committee appointed by the State Government to consider the qu...
Baby Saroja Udyachandji Patani Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1998
Reported in: 1999(4)BomCR197
ORDERA.D. Mane, J.1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith on the request of the learned Counsel for the parties.2. Shri R.S. Deshmukh, learned Assistant Government Pleader, waives notice for the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 and Shri S.C. Bora, learned Counsel, waives notice for the respondents No. 5 and 6.3. On the request of the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the name of the respondent No. 7 is deleted.4. The petitioner has been appointed as part-time Lecturer in Hindi initially for the academic year 1988-89 on the basis of the recommendations of the local Selection Committee. Thereafter the petitioner was appointed as Full time Lecturer in Hindi in Senior College initially for the academic year 1989-90 which was approved by the University. The petitioner was appointed on probation during the relevant year and on her satisfactory performance she was continued as permanent Full time Lecturer in Hindi thereafter. Though the petitioner was entitled to get full salary through the Ba...
Smt. Urmilaben Jayantilal Parikh and Another Vs. the State of Maharash ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)BomCR343
ORDERR.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. By the present petition, the petitioners are seeking relief in the form of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to dereserve Plot Nos. 626/1 and 626/17 belonging to petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 respectively totally admeasuring 897.80 sq. mtrs. situated at village Oshiwara, of Taluka Andheri in Registration District and Sub District of Bombay Suburban and more particularly described in Exh. A to the petition.2. The brief facts relevant for the decision are that the first Development Plan for K/West Ward of Greater Bombay was sanctioned by the respondent No. 1 on 7-7-1966 and it came into force with effect from 8-8-1966 and that at the relevant time, C.T.S. Nos. 626/1 and 626/17 which are the subject matter of the petition were falling under Industrial Zone (I-2). At that time, they were not reserved for any public purpose in the Development Plan. The petitioner No. 1 herein purchased Plot Nos. F-1 to F-16 (C.T.S. No. 626/1 to 626/5) along with some other ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »