Mumbai Court February 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.
Shri Nyaneshwar Bhiku Dhargalkar Vs. Executive Engineer, P.W.D., Goa
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-26-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Bom254; 1999(4)BomCR537; 1999(3)MhLj86
ORDERR.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. This is an application for appointment of arbitrator in terms of provisions contained in section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, hereinafter called as 'the new Act'.2. The respondent invited tenders for the work of improvement and black-topping of the road to Bhutkuwada and Josewada in the village of Socorro. The tender of the petitioner in that regard was accepted by the respondent and the work order was issued on 16-11-1989, and simultaneously the formal agreement between the parties was executed. The date of commencement of the work was 30th November 1989 and the date stipulated for completion of the work was 22nd February 1991. However, on account of certain extra work which was to be carried out, the work could be completed only on 10th April 1991. Moreover, it is the contention of the applicant that the accounts between the parties were not finally settled for a long time and, therefore, the petitioner by notice dated 6th June 1995...
Reliance Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-25-1999
Reported in: (1999)(65)ECC216
1. The 15 applications filed in appeals against 13 orders of the Commissioner (Appeals), which disposed of 15 orders of the Assistant Commissioner impugned before him, are for waiver of deposit of duty totalling Rs. 1.364 crores approximately.2. The advocate for the applicant says that the question in each of these applications is resultant Modvat credit under Rule 57Q of various items. We deal with each of these items.3. Rs. 45.96 lakhs has been denied as credit on nuts bolts, screws and other such fasteners, the basis for which proceedings are not entirely clear. The notice issued alleges that they were not used for producing or processing of goods. In reply, the assessee had contended that the goods are "essential for assembling of various components and parts to make the entire plant". We are unable, at this stage, to agree that the meaning ascribed to these words by the advocate for the applicant that these are used to being together parts of machinery in order to make complete m...
Dr. (Mrs.) Renu Gupta Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-25-1999
Reported in: (2000)72ITD306(Mum.)
1. This is an appeal against block assessment dt. 27th August, 1997, framed under s. 158BC against Dr. (Mrs.) Renu Arunkumar Gupta for the block period from 1st April, 1985 to 26th March, 1996. Before proceeding further, it is essential to acquaint ourselves with the members of the family headed by Shri Sohanlal Gupta. Therefore, a small family tree is furnished below : Dr. (Mrs.) Renu Gupta, BAMS (daughter-in-law & wife of Dr. Arunkumar Gupta) Originally, the family belongs to Bathinda, Punjab. In 1991, Dr.Sohanlal Gupta along with his wife and their son came away to Bombay.Even before coming to Bombay, Mrs. Raj Rani Gupta was said to be running a beauty parlour at Bathinda.2. Unrest in Punjab and consequent violence that erupted in that part of the country seems to be the cause for the family to come down to Bombay with a view to settle themselves down and try their prospects.Mrs. Raj Raji Gupta opened a sex clinic called "Kaya Kalp" firstly at Borivli and later they have opened...
Smt. Rajrani Gupta Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-25-1999
Reported in: (2000)72ITD155(Mum.)
1. The appellant, Smt. Rajrani Gupta, runs a sex and health clinic named "M/s Kayakalp International" and a beauty clinic named "Monalisa". Her husband, Dr. Sohanlal Gupta, is a dental surgeon. Her son, Dr. Arunkumar Gupta, is also a qualified doctor, being a Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicines & Surgery (B.A.M.S.). Her daughter-in-law, Dr.Renu Gupta, is also a qualified doctor and has the same qualifications as that of her husband, Dr. Arunkumar Gupta. There is another entity called "Dr. Sohanlal Gupta (HUF)" in which all the abovementioned persons are members. The entire family was residing at Bathinda, Punjab, upto mid-July 1991. Because of the terrorist activity in the State of Punjab, they moved to Bombay in 1991, where the appellant has been running the aforesaid sex and health and beauty clinics. Her family members have also been working with her as salaried employees.She has set up three branches of her sex and health clinic in Mumbai.The first one was set up at Borivali in 19...
North End Oil Limited Vs. M.V. kim An and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-25-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Bom193; 1999(2)ALLMR47; 1999(2)BomCR448; (1999)2BOMLR150; 1999(3)MhLj15
ORDERD.G. Deshpande, J.1. Heard Advocates for the applicant who has taken out this motion for vacating the order of arrest of Vessel m.v. Kim An and the Advocate for the plaintiffs.2. This motion is taken out by the applicant in the following circumstances.The present suit was filed on 3-11-1998 for recovering a sum of US Dollars 50,000/- and odd together with interest etc. The arrest order was passed by this Court on 3-11-1998 i.e. on the same day of filing of the suit. In the Judge's Order that was passed by this Court for arrest option was given to the defendants to furnish bank guarantee to the extent of the amount claimed in the suit. But according to the applicant, the defendants vessel was purchased by him for the purpose of ship breaking much prior to the order of arrest and before the service of arrest warrant on 5-11-1998 and since demolition activities came to stand still he was required to furnish security under compulsion. According to the applicant, beaching of the vessel...
Gopal Vishnu Vanarase and Others Vs. Mahadev Govind Khire and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-25-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)BomCR174; 2000(1)MhLj143
ORDERT.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. The petitioner is the tenant. He has challenged the decree passed against him by the courts below evicting him from the premises which was let out to him as open space comprising City Survey No. 1019 and 1020 admeasuring to an extent of 6056 sq. ft. Originally the premises was leased out to one Bagade by the father of the present respondent No. 1. It appears that the original tenant without permission of the landlord constructed a shed in the premises and started running floor mill and oil mill in the said shed. On 27th September, 1964 the aforesaid Bagade sold oil mill to Vishnu Narayan Vanarase father of the present petitioner No. 1 and Vaman Mulay. Consequently rent note was executed by Mahadev Khire, the father of the respondent No. 1 accepting them as tenant and the rent was also refixed at Rs. 150/- per annum. Said Mr. Mulay expired and father of the petitioners became sole owner. 2. On 10-1-1979 a Notice to quash was issued by Mahadev G. Khire...
Mohammed Arif DIn Mohd, Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-25-1999
Reported in: 2000(5)BomCR95; 2000BomCR(Cri)95; 1999CriLJ2645
ORDERVishnu Sahai, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. This is an application for bail in a case under section 307, I.P.C. On 4-7-1997, sometimes between 7 to 7.30 p.m. Rajiv Roy, son of late Gulshan Roy, a Film ProducerDirector and Distributor by profession received a telephone call from Dubai and the caller gave him a telephone number of Dubai and asked him to contact Abu Salem. Rajiv Roy telephoned Dubai and the person from the other end said^^vki jktho xSx ds vkWQhl esa cksy jgs gks D;k** and disconnected the telephone. Ten days later, Rajiv Roy received another telephone call from Dubai and asked his operator to talk to the caller. The operator tape recorded the conversation which pertained to a demand of Rs. 20 crores and a threat that he and his family members would be killed if they failed to fulfil it, Thereafter, one day the said person rang from Dubai and threatened Rajiv Roy's wife and told her that her husband had not telephoned Abu Salem, even after he had been as...
Homi F. Commissariat and Another Vs. Gowani Developers Pvt. Ltd. and O ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-24-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)ALLMR67; 1999(2)BomCR395; (1999)2BOMLR259; 1999(2)MhLj307
ORDERS.S. Nijjar, J. 1. The plaintiffs and defendants No. 4 and 5 are members of an undivided family. They are co-owners and lessees and holders of the leasehold rights and interests in a piece and parcel of land being Plot No. 2 bearing C.S. No. 2-N/738 of Malabar Hill and Cumbala Hill Division within the city and registration sub-District of Mumbai containing by admeasurements 3349.53 Sq. metres which together with the buildings and outhouses thereon said land consist of the following :---'(a) A main bungalow consisting of ground and one upper floor with terrace partially covered; (b) Outhouse containing prayer room, kitchen, store room etc.; (c) Servants Quarters; (d) Structure containing garages. The aforesaid is referred to hereinafter as 'the suit property'. 2. Plaintiff No. 2 is the son of plaintiff No. 1. Defendant No. 4 is the son of defendant No. 5. Plaintiff No. 1's late father Framji and defendant No. 5 were brothers. Defendant No. 1 (hereinafter called 'the Company') is a ...
Ramdhanlal S/O MoharajdIn Jaiswal Vs. M/S. Pralhad Agency
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-24-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)BomCR125; 1999(3)MhLj923
ORDERS.B. Mhase, J.1. This civil revision application is directed against the order of the District Judge, Aurangabad dated 20-8-1990, passed in M.A.R.J.I. No. 138 of 1990, whereby the prayer made by the petitioner for condonation of delay has been rejected, which ultimately resulted into rejection of appeal filed against the Rent Case No. 89/RC/CR/ARC/7, decided on 20-1-1990 by the Rent Controller, Aurangabad.2. The ground for the condonation of delay is that the summons by the Rent Controller was not served in accordance with law and, therefore, the petitioner could not participate in those rent proceedings. It is submitted that the summons should have been served in accordance with Order 5, Rule 17 read with Rule 19 of the Code of Civil Procedure and as the Rent Controller has failed to comply with those provisions, it cannot be said that the Rent Controller has decided the matter after a due service to the petitioner. 3. It appears that the District Judge has remanded the matter an...
Smt. Yogini Chandrakant Mehta Vs. the Official Assignee, High Court, B ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-24-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALLMR316; 1999(2)BomCR719; (1999)2BOMLR428; 1999(2)MhLj263
ORDERA.V. Savant, J.1. Heard both the learned Counsel; Mr. Doctor for the appellant (Original Claimant) and Mr. Jain for respondent No. 1-Official Assignee, High Court, Bombay.2. The appeal is against the order dated 15th January, 1999 passed by the learned Single Judge on the report made by the Official Assignee on 18th March, 1995, in Insolvency Petition No. 84 of 1977 which was filed by the Petitioning Creditors M/s. Cable Corporation of India Ltd., respondent No. 2, for a declaration that respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5 were insolvents. The appellant (Original Claimant) Smt. Yogini Mehta is the wife of respondent No. 4 Chandrakant Mehta. By an order passed on 7th September, 1977 in Insolvency Petition No. 84 of 1977, respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5 were adjudged insolvents. The inventory of the movables was prepared on 17th October 1977.3. The appellant made a claim in respect of two flats viz. flats Nos. B/ 28-29 situated at Vellard View Premises Co-operative Society Ltd., 3rd floor, 'B' Wi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »