Mumbai Court October 1999 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.
National Textile Corporation (Maharashtra North) Ltd. and ors. Vs. S.M ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-25-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)ALLMR376; (2000)IIILLJ555Bom
ORDERH.L. Gokhale, J.1. All these writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are concerning the right of the employees in the Cotton Textile Industry in the local area of Mumbai to work upto the age of 63 years. These petitions are filed either by the Textile Mill/Company or by the employees concerned challenging the orders passed by the Industrial Court constituted under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (MRTU & PULP Act, for short) on the complaints filed by these employees against these Mill Companies invoking items 1, 5, 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the said Act. It is, therefore, that all these petitions have been directed to be heard together and are accordingly being decided together.2. The Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946, governs the relationship between the employers and the employees engaged in this Cotton Textile Industry. Under Chapter VII of this Act, Standing Orders are required to ...
Syed Yusuf Syed Noor Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-25-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ3409
Y.K. Sabharwal, C.J.1. The appellant was prosecuted for an offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii) and Section 27 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the NDPS Act'), on the allegations that on 29th February, 1996, an information was received that he was possessing and selling brown sugar in his residence. After compliance of the provisions of the NDPS Act, according to the prosecution, the raid was conducted at the house of the appellant and during search, brown sugar weighing 31/2 Grams was found in his possession. It was seized and sealed in presence of the Panchas and the appellant was arrested. The charge under Section 20(1)(b) of the NDPS Act was framed against the appellant by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Akola, on 8th July, 1996. The prosecution examined six witnesses, including Panch, PW. 1 - Uday s/o Manohar Fase, and the Investigating Officer, P.W.6 - Vinod s/o Ganpatrao Raut. The learned Additional Sessions Ju...
Globex Financial Services Ltd. and ors. Vs. Bakulesh T. Shah and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-25-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)ALLMR419; (2000)102BOMLR795
H.L. Gokhale, J.1. This revision application seeks to challenge the judgment and order dated 16th March, 1999 passed by a learned Judge of the City Civil Court at Mumbai in Short Cause Suit No. 512 of 1998. The petitioners herein are the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 in that suit and they raised an issue on 8th June, 1998 contending under Section 9A of the Civil Procedure Code (which section is a Maharashtra addition) that the City Civil Court does not have the pecuniary jurisdiction to try and entertain the said suit. That application came to be rejected by the impugned oral judgment and order dated 16th March, 1999 passed by the learned Judge. Being aggrieved by that judgment and order, this Revision Application has been filed. There was an accompanying Appeal from order arising out of the ad interim and interim orders in that suit being Appeal From Order No. 537 of 1999. This Revision Application was placed along with that Appeal From Order before me since both were connected matters. Subs...
Sayed Yusuf Syed Noor Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-25-1999
Reported in: 2000(70)ECC696
Y.K. Sabharwal, C.J.1. The appellant was prosecuted for an offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii) and Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the NDPS Act'), on the allegation that on 29th February, 1996, an information was received that he was possessing and selling brown sugar in his residence. After compliance of the provisions of the NDPS Act, according to the prosecution, the raid was conducted at the house of the appellant and during search, brown sugar weighing 3-1/2 grams was found in his possession. It was seized and sealed in presence of the Panchas and the appellant was arrested. The charge under Section 20(1)(b) of the NDPS Act was framed against the appellant by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Akola, on 8th July, 1996. The prosecution examined six witnesses, including Panch, PW. 1 -- Uday s/o Manohar Fase, and the Investigating Officer, P.W. 6--Vinod s/o Ganpatrao Raut. The learned Additional Sessions J...
Berlia Chemicals and Traders (P) Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Cit
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-25-1999
Reported in: (2002)76TTJ(Mumbai)974
ORDERPradeep Parikh, A.M.The assessee is in appeal before us against the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals), dated 18-10-1993, for assessment year 1990-91. First ground in the appeal is against disallowance of Rs. 26,00,000 being depreciation on wastage heat recovery boiler.2. The assessee-company is engaged in the business of trading in chemicals. It returned a loss of Rs. 6,88,375 after claiming deprecation of Rs. 28,97,697. The assessee was assessed at a positive income of Rs. 25,36,330 under section 143(3) of the Act, the major disallowance being that of depreciation amounting to Rs. 26 lakhs, the facts relating to which are narrated hereinafter. Assessee-company purchased waste heat recovery boiler, which is an energy-saving plant, from its sister concern M/s. Barium Chemicals Ltd. for a consideration of Rs. 26 lakhs. Payment was made by book entries. Barium Chemicals Ltd. in the fact owed some amount to the assessee-company and hence by adjusting the purchase price of th...
Mr. Chiman Narayan Taras and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-22-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Bom100; 2000(1)ALLMR427; 2000(1)BomCR540; (2000)2BOMLR170
ORDERN.J. Pandya, J.1. These petitions relate to the question of acquisition of some of the lands of village Kiwale, Taluka-Haveli, District-Pune, in connection with Mumbai-Pune Express Highway. In the first of the two petitions, there are five petitioners belonging to one Taras family of the said village. In the other petition, there are three petitioners of Admane family and another, one Mrs. Mukta Sunil Chaitanya is having interest in one of the lands of that village under acquisition, though she resides at Nigadi, Pune. Needless to say, the petitioners of the first petition are of village Kiwale.2. It is an admitted position that the acquisition work for the said project was initiated in the year 1995 and the work had commenced. While acquisition proceedings were in progress under section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, there appeared newspaper items to the effect that the changes are being thought of at different places on the said Expressway, particularly with reference to t...
Nagorao Narayan Diewane Since Deceased Through Heirs Vs. Narayan Awadu ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-22-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALLMR555; 2000(4)BomCR165; (2000)1BOMLR857; 2000(2)MhLj273
ORDERP.S. Bramhe, J.1. This second appeal is preferred by the original defendant in Regular Civil Suit No. 104/74 who lost the battle in trial Court as well as first Appellate Court. The Trial Court by his judgment dated 12th day of November 1979 passed by the 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Yavatmal Shri K.R. Malviya, decreed plaintiff's suit by making a declaration that the suit plot was purchased by defendant Benami for plaintiff and as such plaintiff was owner of the same. The appellant defendant preferred Regular Civil Appeal No. 50/980 challenging the judgment and decree passed on 12-11-1979. The learned Assistant Judge, Yavatmal Shri M.G. Palhade by his judgment dated 28-1-1983 dismissed the appeal confirming the decree passed by trial Court. Thus the appellant defendant has preferred this appeal challenging the judgment and decree passed by the first Appellate Court in R.C.A. No. 50/1980. The appellant defendant is uncle of original plaintiff now the respondent in this ...
Shri Atul Ramrao Kothare Vs. Shri Upendra K. Majithia
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-21-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALLMR19; 2000(2)BomCR45; (2000)2BOMLR380
ORDERD.K. DESHMUKH, J.1. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the award passed by the Sole Arbitrator. The first submission that is advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the premises from which the business of the firm was being carried on has been wrongly held to be an asset of the firm. Perusal of the award however, shows that the Arbitrator has given detailed reasons for recording a finding that the premises from where the business of the firm was conducted is an asset of the firm. The Arbitrator has drawn certain inferences from the conduct of the petitioner before the Arbitrator. 2. It was next submitted that the Arbitrator has ignored the liability of the bank against the firm. Relying on a judgment of this Court in the case of Chandrabhan Rupchand Dakhale and others v. Birdichand Lalchand Navlakha and others, reported in 1983 Mah.L.J. 1043, it was submitted that in view of the provisions of section 48 of the Partnership Act, the liability of the firm ...
The Bombay Catholic Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. V.B. Mathank ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-21-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALLMR681; 2000(2)BomCR480; (2000)1BOMLR827; 2000(3)MhLj273
ORDERR.M. Lodha, J.1. The Bombay Catholic Co-operative Housing Society Limited-the petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the legality and correctness of the order passed by the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, H-West Ward, Fort, Bombay, the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bombay Region, Bombay, the State Government in its revisional jurisdiction dated 22-2-1983, 19-9-1989 and 24-6-1991 respectively and the communication dated 18-1-90 received by the petitioner from the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bombay. In substance, the petitioner is aggrieved by the order of bifurcation of society passed by the Assistant Registrar on 22-2-1983 under section 18 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 confirmed in appeal and revision by the appellate and revisional authorities. 2. The facts, necessary for disposal of the writ petition, which are reflected therefrom are: The petitioner-...
Abhimanyu Vishwanath and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-21-1999
Reported in: (2000)102BOMLR487
B.B. Vagyani, J.1. Heard learned Advocate Shri R.N. Dhorde for the petitioners and Shri V.D. Sapkal, learned A.P.P., for the State.Rule, returnable forthwith with the consent of the parties.2. The present petitioners are prosecuted for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act. The charge-sheet came to be filed on 15th February, 1993. The list of witnesses was filed on 24th of May, 1996. The plea of accused was recorded on 31st of May, 1996. There was no progress after recording of plea of the petitioners. No oral evidence was recorded by the Special Judge.3. Relying on Raj Deo Sharma's, case AIR 1998 SC 3281, the present petitioners filed application dated 7.7.1999, in the Trial Court and sought a direction from the Court to close the prosecution evidence. The said application has been rejected by the Judge, Special Court, Ahmednagar, by order dated 7.7.1999. This rejection order is challenged in this Criminal Writ Petition.4. Learned...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »