Mumbai Court November 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.
Employees State Insurance Corporation Vs. Sidram Narayan Madhur and or ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-26-1999
Reported in: [2000(85)FLR346]; (2000)ILLJ1300Bom
ORDERKochar, J.1. The appellant is a statutory Corporation established under the provisions of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 for implementation and enforcement of the beneficial legislation which was enacted to provide for certain benefits to employees in case of sickness, employment injury and also to make provisions for certain other matters in relation thereto. The E.S.I. Act provides for applicability of the provisions of the Act to such establishments or factories as prescribed therein. A detailed procedure is also laid down in the Act as also in the rules and regulations framed thereunder. The Act is a self-contained Code in itself and it provides for adjudicating machinery and a forum in the form of Employees State Insurance Court which has all the trappings of a Civil Court and which functions as a Court of law to resolve the disputes between the employees-employers Corporation within the four corners of the Act.2. The Respondents herein are the members of one family ...
Kulwant Singh Vs. Reliance Petrochemicals Ltd. and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-26-1999
Reported in: [2000(85)FLR849]; (2000)IIILLJ766Bom
A.P. Shah, J.1. The petitioner Shri Kulwant Singh is an ex-naval personnel and after serving the Navy as a Gunner took employment in Reliance Petrochemicals Ltd. the respondent no. 1 herein, as a security-cum-administrative officer with effect from July 14, 1989. On November 9, 1990 the petitioner was confirmed by the respondent No. 1 on satisfactory completion of probation period and he continued to render services in that post till his services were terminated on June 28, 1991. The termination of services led to an industrial dispute being raised, and ultimately the Deputy Commissioner, Labour Court (Administration) Bombay made a reference to the 5th Labour Court at Bombay, for adjudication upon the industrial dispute involving the question of the validity and legality of the order of termination of service of the petitioner. The reference also required the Labour Court to enquire whether the petitioner is to be reinstated in service with full back wages and continuity in service wit...
Damu Sripati Waghmode Vs. Sou. Nagar Damu Waghmode and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-26-1999
Reported in: II(2000)DMC430
Ranjana Desai, J.1. In this petition, the petitioner seeks setting aside of the order dated 8.1.1993 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pandharpur, in Criminal Revision Application No. 122 of 1989. He also prays that the order of the Trial Court in Criminal Misc. Application No. 229 of 1988 be restored.2. The petitioner was married to respondent No. 1 in the year 1975. Respondent No. 1 filed application for maintenance against the petitioner under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code') being Misc. Application No. 171 of 1979 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pandharpur. Admittedly, the learned Magistrate awarded maintenance at the rate of Rs. 60/- per month to respondent No. 1.3. Respondent No. 1 preferred Misc. Application No. 80 of 1982 for enhancement of maintenance. There is no dispute that the maintenance amount was enhanced from Rs. 60/- to Rs. 90/- per month by the learned Magistrate. It appears that as the petitioner was not re...
Messrs. Baijnath Melaram Vs. Navinchandra P. Patil
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-26-1999
Reported in: (2000)102BOMLR206
J.A. Patil, J.1. The only short question involved in this Appeal by the Appellants (Original Defendants) is whether the suit claim is barred by limitation. The learned City Civil Court, Mumbai, having decided the question in favour of the Plaintiff, the aggrieved Defendants have come in Appeal. The facts, which are relevant for the purpose of deciding the said question, are undisputed and in brief, they are as under :2. Under an agreement dated 7.1.1966, the Respondent (Original plaintiff) sold a ship called 'S.S. August Levers' to the defendants for a price of Rs. 3,47,500/- and delivered the said ship to the defendants on 11th June, 1966. The agreement of sale contained a clause which put an obligation on the defendants to pay import duty, octroi, sales tax, etc, payable to the Government or any other authority. It further provided that in case any such tax or duty was charged, demanded or recovered by the Government or any authority from the plaintiff, then the defendants shall fort...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Morarji Goculdas Spg. and Wvg. Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-26-1999
Reported in: [2000]108TAXMAN502(Bom)
Saraf, J.By this reference under section 2 56(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this Court for opinion:'Whether, on the' facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to deduction of differential excise duty to the extent of Rs. 76,52,169 for the assessment year 1981-82 ?'2. The material facts giving rise to this reference are as follows:The assessee is a public limited company running a spinning and weaving mill. On the production of yarn, the assessee had been paying Central excise duty on the basis of weight of the upsized yarn. However, in the accounting year ending on 30-6-1980, relevant to the assessment year, 1981-82, some dispute arose in regard to the calculation of the excise duty on the basis of the weight of the yam before it was sized. The Excise department was of the, opinion that excise duty was payable on the basis of the weight after sizing....
Trimurthy Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-1999
Reported in: (2000)(118)ELT445Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an application for early hearing of the appeal. In the appeal, an application for stay was filed and by our Order No.C-II/162/98-WZB, dated 15-1-1999, we have dismissed the stay application. Early hearing has been sought on the ground that principles of natural justice had not been followed in passing the impugned order by the adjudicating authority. On instruction from the appellant, the ld. Counsel informs us that the firm's turnover is over Rs. One crore. The amount involved is Rs. Two lakhs or penalty. Nothing prevented the applicant from depositing 2% of the turnover viz. Rs. Two lakhs and agitate the matter. We are, therefore, of the view that it is not a fit case for early hearing inasmuch as there are 30,000 appeals are pending before the Tribunal. No genuine ground is made out for out of turn hearing of this appeal. The Misc. application stands dismissed....
M/S. Universal Cine Trades Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Susheela Yeshwant Prabhu ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALLMR506; 2000(2)BomCR606; 2000(4)MhLj123
ORDERR.J. Kochar, J.1. The petitioners-employer has challenged the judgment and order dated 9-1-1989 given by the Industrial Court, Maharashtra, Bombay in Complaint (U.L.P) No. 886 of 1985. The concerned employee who is no more alive, having expired on 1-3-1987, will be referred hereinafter by me as the 'concerned employee', had filed a complaint of Unfair Labour Practice under section 28 r/w 30 and Items 4(f) of Schedule II and Items 7 and 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act 1971 (for short M.R.T.U. & P.U.L.P. Act). His grievance in the complaint was that he was retired prematurely as his correct birth date was 24-9-1929 and therefore he was entitled to continue upto 24-9-1989. He therefore complained that his superannuation on the basis of the alleged birth date of 1924 was an unfair labour practice, within the meaning of Item 9 of Schedule IV of the Act. The only grievance made by him is his premature superannua...
Smt. Sandhya Rajan Antapurkar and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)ALLMR331; 2000(2)BomCR832; I(2001)DMC135; 2000(2)MhLj58
ORDERA.S. Bagga, J.1. This appeal is filed against the judgment and order passed on 4-1-1999 in Misc. Civil Application No. 130 of 1998 by the Joint Civil Judge, S.D., Jalgaon.2. Misc. Civil Application came to be filed by the appellants seeking permission for sale of property (house property) in which the appellants have 1/ 5th share.3. The property originally belonged to one Madhukar Pandurang Antapurkar who died on 3-3-1995 leaving behind him two sons Rajan andAnil and three daughters namely; Vijaya, Rajni and Sunita. Rajan died on 5-5-1995 leaving behind him widow Sandhya and daughters Shweta and Kavita-the appellants herein. Deceased Rajan had got 1/5th share in the property that has devolved upon present appellants. The property, which is intended to be sold, admittedly is a joint family property in which appellants have 1/ 5th share. The permission for sale is sought under section 8 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 and, section 29 of the Guardians and Wards Act, ...
Gokul Dadu Jadhav and Another Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-1999
Reported in: 2000(5)BomCR489; 2000BomCR(Cri)489; (2000)2BOMLR213; 2000(1)MhLj461
ORDERVishnu Sahai, J.1. Though this appeal, the appellants challenge the judgment and order dated 17-6-1995 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, in Sessions Case No. 123 of 1994, convicting and sentencing them in the manner stated hereinafter:- (i) Gokul Dadu Jadhav:---Under section 302 I.P.C. to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/ - in default to undergo three months R.I.; and (ii) Datta Suresh Awale:---Under section 302 r/w 34 I.P.C. to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- in default to undergo three months R.I. It is pertinent to mention that along with the appellants, was tried one Digambar Khandale but, he has been acquitted vide the impugned judgment and the State of Maharashtra has not challenged his acquittal by preferring an appeal under section 378(1) Cr.P.C. 2. In short, the prosecution case runs as under:- On 9-1-1994, there was marriage of Sham Bate P.W. 2 in Kasam Zopdpatti within the limits of District Pune. The mar...
Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh Vs. S.L. Mehendele, Member Industrial Cou ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-1999
Reported in: (2000)IIILLJ1178Bom
ORDERA.P. Shah, J. 1. The only issue which falls for consideration in this petition is 'whether, under the Standing Order 4(C) even if the employees have completed 240 days of service, there must be a post available to regularise them?'. Only few facts need to be stated in order to appreciate the controversy raised in the petition. The petitioner is a representative Union in the cotton textile industry under the provisions of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946, hereinafter referred to as the 'BIR Act'. Respondent No. 2 is a Cotton Textile Mill covered under the said Act and employed more than 100 employees. The petitioner filed Complaint (ULP) No. 1625 of 1991 in the Industrial Court, Mumbai alleging unfair labour practices on the part of the employer under items 8 & 9 of Schedule I of the MRTU and PULP Act, 1971. In the said Complaint, the Union espoused the cause of the employees of Respondent No. 2 whose names are listed in Exh. A to this petition. The grievance of the listed...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »