Mumbai Court August 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.
Mr. Gaspar G. Furtado Vs. Mrs. Filomena Cota and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-13-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALLMR605; 2000(2)BomCR118; 2000(2)MhLj87
ORDERR.K. Batta, J.1. The petitioner (hereinafter referred to as plaintiff) had filed a suit for damages suffered by him on account of fall of three trees on his water tank. Prior to the fall of the said trees, notice had been given by the plaintiff to the respondents to cut the said trees. The respondents did not take any action and eventually the trees fell on the water tank of the plaintiff.2. In the suit it appears that written statement was filed without signatures. Subsequently the respondents did not put in appearance and the suit proceeded ex parte. The plaintiff led evidence ex parte and the suit was decreed on 2nd August, 1996 to the tune of Rs. 12,000/-. The respondents 4, 5 and 7 who are defendants 4, 5 and 7 had filed an application for setting aside the ex parte decree on 6th August, 1997 and alongwith that application they filed an application for condonation of delay, which was granted. Respondent No. 1/defendant No. 1 had also filed an application for setting aside the...
Katkar Engineers Vs. M.M.T.C. Limited
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-13-1999
Reported in: (2000)102BOMLR128
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. This is an application under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, hereinafter called as 'the said Act' for the appointment of Arbitrator.2. It is the case of the Applicants that the Applicants were awarded the work of screening of lumpy ore at Sanvordem by Work Order dated 3rd October, 1997 in terms of the agreement entered into between the parties. Clause 12 thereof provided that all the disputes, differences, arising out of or in connection with and/or consequences of or relating to the agreement whatsoever shall be referred to arbitration under the said Act. Since disputes and differences have arisen between the parties, the Applicants by letter dated 4th November, 1998 submitted certain claims to the Respondent which were denied and disputed by the Respondent by letter dated 16th November, 1998. The Applicants, therefore, by letter dated 28th January, 1999 called upon the Respondent to agree to concur with the appointment of Shri B....
Samrat Shipping Co. P. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-1999
Reported in: (2000)(67)ECC637
1. This is the party's appeal against the impugned orders dated 26.11.93, praying for setting aside the same and quashing show cause notice dated 1.1.93 so far as appellant is concened, and for refund of penalty amount of Rs. 51,000 with interest at 15% p.a. from the date of deposit, till payment.The facts of the case in brief are that the appellant is the shipping agent of foreign ships and ship-owners, a company registered under Companies Act, 1956. The appellant was the main agent of cargo vessel M.V. Paithoon Voy. 63 (Vessel) which arrived at Bombay on 15.10.92 to discharge and deliver cargo for Bombay, M/s. Forbes & Forbes Campbell & Co. Ltd. (FFC & Co.) was the sub-agent of the said vessel and for cargo in question in six containers, which belonged to and owned by M/s. NYK lines, whose agent was F.F.C. & Co. and not the appellant. Cargo was stuffed into containers by the shippers M/s. China Chun Petrochemicals Ltd. All the containers were FCL containers. Bill of ...
Lloyds Steels Indus. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-1999
Reported in: (1999)(113)ELT628Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The question for consideration in this appeal is whether the hot rolled steel plates imported by the appellant in 1989 could be entitled to the benefit of the exemption contained in Customs notification dated 16-6-1987. In the order impugned in the appeal, Collector (Appeals) has confirmed the Assistant Collector's finding that benefit would not be available.2. The notification "exempts goods falling under sub-headings 8901.10, 8901.20, 8901.30, 8901.19, 8902.00, 8904.00, 8905.10, 8905.90, 8906.00 of the First Schedule F to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) and manufactured in a warehouse" in accordance with the provisions of Section 65 of the Customs Act from duty. It is the contention of the Advocate for the appellant that the notification as have read literally, is not capable of operation. He contends that goods cannot be imported and at the same time manufactured in warehouse. He says that the scope of the notification has been made clear by a latter Notification No. 3...
Gordhanbhai N. Patel Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-1999
Reported in: (2000)(118)ELT233Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These two appeals arise out of the same order and are therefore being disposed of together vide this common order.2. We have heard Shri P.V. Patankar for the appellants and Shri K.M.Patwari for the Revenue.3. The two appellants namely Shri G.N. Patel and his wife Smt.Savitriben on arrival to India were required to declare the goods imported by them. Before the officers Shri G.N. Patel declared some dutibale articles and also 5 kgs. of gold. Duty deposit receipt was accordingly made. Subsequently on suspicion, their baggage was examined. The examination resulted in the recovery of a total quantity of 9.220 kgs. of gold. Out of this quantity, gold weighing 220 grams was found stitched into trousers' pocket after being wrapped in carbon paper. The Customs authorities thereafter seized the entire quantity of gold. Shri G.N. Patel in his statement accepted the fact that he had failed to declare 4.220 kgs. of gold with intent to evade duty. Smt.Savitriben Patel deposed that the formaliti...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Shalimar Textile Mfg. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-1999
Reported in: (2000)(117)ELT146Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This case was posted for admission. After hearing Shri K.L. Ramteke for the Revenue the appeal was admitted and was taken up for disposal since the issue was found to be well settled.2. The assessees had declared aluminium sheets, circles and strips falling under Heading 7606.10 as well as 7606.20 in their declaration filed under Rule 57Q. In the invoices the inputs received were shown as "aluminium plates". The Assistant Commissioner denied the credit on the ground that sheets and plates were different products differently shown in the tariff. He ruled that the inputs received were not declared in the declaration. On this ground he denied the credit. Before the Commissioner (Appeals) five judgments of the Tribunal were cited. He has not discussed the judgments in his order but accorded relief to the assessees. The Revenue have filed this appeal against this order. In the appeal memorandum it is claimed that there is a substantial difference between plates and sheets in dimensions ...
Harilal Jechand Doshi Ghatkopar Hindu Sabha Hospital Vs. Maharashtra G ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)ALLMR742; 2000(1)BomCR620; (2000)ILLJ419Bom; 2000(2)MhLj123
ORDERA.P. Shah, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenges the order dated 29th January, 1999 made by the Industrial Court, Mumbai, in Complaint (U.L.P.) No. 133 of 1995, a proceeding under the provisions of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, hereinafter referred to as the M.R.T.U. Act.2. The petitioner Harilal Jechand Doshi Ghatkopar Hindu Sabha Hospital is a charitable hospital. The respondent No. 1 is a trade union, who had filed the above complaint before the Industrial Court, Mumbai, on behalf of a member-employee Smt. Indira Vyas. The concerned employee was working with the petitioner as part-time clerk since 1979 and drawing a sum of Rs. 892.60 as wages comprising of Rs. 412/- as basic and Rs. 480.60 as dearness allowance. On 8th November, 1991, the concerned employee was appointed as a full-time permanent clerk. She was paid total wages amounting to Rs. 1154/- comprising of Rs. 227/- as ba...
Snp Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Kara Mara Shipping Co. Ltd. and or ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Bom57; (1997)3BOMLR651; 2000(1)MhLj699
ORDERR.M. Lodha, J. 1. I shall dispose of two notices of motion taken out by defendant No. 2 viz. World Tanker Carriers Corporation (WTCC) by this order. By means of notice of Motion No. 2971 of 1998 it is prayed by WTCC that suit be dismissed. This prayer primarily is made under Order 7, Rule 11, CPC based on the ground that this Court has no jurisdiction. By another notice of motion No. 1637 of 1998, WTCC prays that the plaint be struck off as being unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous and vexatious and also being an abuse of process of the Court under Order6, Rule 16 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure and for quashing as being contemptuous abuse of the process of the Court and malicious. In the alternative it is prayed that the plaintiffs -- SNP Shipping Services (Pvt.) Ltd. (for short 'SNP Shipping') be directed to withdraw this suit.2. SNP Shipping are the plaintiffs in Admiralty Suit No. 58 of 1998 filed under the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 (Act...
Kazi Syed ZahiruddIn S/O. Syed BadruddIn Vs. Industrial Court, Amravat ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-1999
Reported in: (2001)IIILLJ511Bom
D.D. Sinha, J.1. Heard Shri Papinwar, learned counsel for petitioner. Respondent No. 2 though served, remained absent. The writ petition is directed against the judgment and order dated February 15, 1999 passed by the Member, Industrial Court, Amravati in Complaint (ULP) No. 143 of 1996 whereby the complaint filed by the present petitioner under Item 9 Rule 4 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 was dismissed 2. Shri Papinwar, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner was serving as an Engineer in the Department run by respondent No. 2. The petitioner, while he was in the employment of respondent No. 2, has submitted application for voluntary retirement, dated May 17, 1995 and requested the respondent No. 2 to allow him to retire from service w.e.f. August 17, 1995. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner therefore changed his mind and decided to revoke/cancel his application for voluntary re...
Bharati N. Wadhwana and ors. Vs. Arjun Kishandas Jaisingh and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-1999
Reported in: 2000BomCR(Cri)436; [2003]115CompCas298(Bom)
D.G. Deshpande, J.1. Heard Mr. Marwadi for the petitioners, Mr. Desai for respondent No. 1 and learned APP, Mr. Galeria, for the State.2. This petition is filed for quashing the proceedings initiated against the petitioners under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. It was contended by counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Marwadi, that the petitioners, who were original accused Nos. 4, 6, 8 and 11 in the original complaint, had resigned before or at the time when the cheque was issued, and, therefore, they were not liable for prosecution. However, counsel for respondent No. 1, Mr. Desai, has strongly contended that as the fact of resignation of these directors was seriously disputed by the complainant and unless the accused proved in their defence before the trial court that the directors/petitioners had resigned and that the resignation was as per the provisions of the Companies Act and as per the articles of association and memorandum of association of the company, that t...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »