Mumbai Court January 2000 Judgments

Dr. Suresh Srikrishna Naik Vs. Karamveer Hire Rural Institute and Othe ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2000(2)ALLMR94; 2000(2)BomCR522; (2000)2BOMLR199

ORDERR.K. Batta, J.1. Rule.With the consent of the learned Advocates for the parties, rule is made returnable forthwith and heard.2. The petitioner retired from service on 30th April, 1994 after serving as Lecturer in Social Work in Karamveer Hire Rural Institute, Gargoti, Dist. Kolhapur (respondent No. 1) from 27-6-1961 to 20-6-1967, after which he had worked as Senior Lecturer in Social Work in Karve Institute of Social Work (respondent No. 2) from 1-7-1967 to 24-6-1981 and, finally, he was Professor-in-charge in Social Science Centre, Bharati Vidyapeeth, Pune (respondent No. 3) from 25-6-1981 to 30-4-1994. According to the petitioner, the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 institutes are not only recognised by the Social Welfare Department of the Government of Maharashtra, but the said Institutes are also receiving grant-in-aid. The petitioner's grievance is that though he had worked for 32 years in the said Institutes and is eligible for pension scheme, yet retirement benefits such as gratuity...

Odex Chemicals P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2001)(130)ELT923Tri(Mum.)bai

1. In this case today the application for stay has been posted. The question involved in the stay application is for waiver of deposit in respect of Modvat credit on capital goods in respect of the goods weigh bridge. Since the matter is already covered by the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of J.K. Pharmachem Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise Tiruchirapalli -1998 (102) E.L.T. 488, the appeal itself could be disposed of, hence I have taken up the appeal itself for disposal with the consent of both the sides at the waiving pre-deposit.2. In this case Modvat credit under Rule 57Q has been claimed in respect of weighing scales the said judgment at paragraph 12, the Tribunal has held as follows : "We have considered the submissions of both the sides. It is now seen that under 57Q(1)(c) weighing bridges are included and the function of weighing scales are also similar in nature in view of the fact that the same are used for weighing the batches of inputs. In that view of the matt...

Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Mrs. Zita Welinkar

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2001)77ITD61(Mum.)

1. These two appeals filed by the Revenue pertain to the assessment years 1990-91 and 1991-92. The facts necessary for disposal of these appeals are as under :-- 2. The assessee is a non-resident Indian settled in England. She inherited from the estate of her husband, Late Shri Subodh Welinkar certain shares which were purchased by him by utilising convertible; foreign exchange money. The assessee's husband expired on 16-1-1983 and the permission to transfer the shares in the name of the assessee was given somewhere in the year 1989. During the previous year relevant to the assessment years under consideration, the assessee sold .some equity shares of Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizer Ltd., Tala Engineering & Locomotive Co. Ltd, and Grasim Industries Ltd. In the returns filed, the assessee claimed taxability of capital gains as per proviso to section 48(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act read with Rule 115A of the Income-tax Rules.3. The Assessing Officer denied the benefit of proviso to...

Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs. Mrs. Zita Welinkar

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. These two appeals filed by the Revenue pertain to the asst. yrs.1990-91 and 1991-92. The facts necessary for disposal of these appeals are as under : The assessee is a non-resident Indian settled in England. She inherited from the estate of her husband, Late Shri Subodh Welinkar certain shares which were purchased by him by utilising convertible foreign exchange money. The assessee's husband expired on 16th January, 1983 and the permission to transfer the shares in the name of the assessee was given somewhere in the year 1989. During the previous year relevant to the assessment years under consideration, the assessee sold some equity shares of Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizer Ltd. Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co. Ltd. and Grasim Industries Ltd. In the returns filed, the assessee claimed taxability of capital gains as per proviso to s. 48(1)(a) of the IT Act r/w r. 115A of the IT Rules.2. The AO denied the benefit of proviso to s. 48 of the Act on the ground that the assessee ...

Union of India Vs. Suresh Jayantilal Thanawala and Others

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2000(2)ALLMR261; 2000(3)BomCR69

ORDERD.K. Deshmukh, J. 1. This is a notice of motion taken out by the defendants Nos. 1 & 2 for rejection of the plaint filed by the plaintiff under Order VII, Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. The case of the defendants Nos. 1 & 2 is that the principal prayer that is made in the suit is for a declaration that the order dated 22-6-1995 passed by the Collector, Bombay in Case No. 1/95 and the order dated 12-6-1996 passed by the State Government are illegal, bad in law and null and void. According to the plaintiff, the order dated 22-6-1995 was passed by the Collector pursuant to a direction issued by the State Government by order dated 2-3-1995 directing the collector, Bombay to hold an inquiry under sub-section (2) of section 20 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code to find out whether the defendant No. 1 has title to the land. Pursuant to that reference, the Collector, Bombay made an order accepting the claim made by the defendant No. 1 that he is the owner of the land and r...

Association of Engineering Workers Vs. Indian Smelting and Refinery Co ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2000(1)ALLMR485; 2000(3)BomCR75; (2000)IILLJ340Bom; 2000(3)MhLj535

ORDERV.C. DAGA, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 7th February 1995 passed in Writ Petition No. 21 of 1995, dismissing the writ petition challenging the order passed by the President, Industrial Court, Maharashtra Bombay, (hereinafter called respondent No. 2 for short) in Misc. Application (T.R-II) Nos. 55 ,56, 57, 58 and 59 of 1994) in Reference (I.D.A) 328, 437, 462, 854, 828 of 1988. 2. The appellant original writ petitioner is a Trade Union registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926. The respondent No. 1 is a Company duly registered under the Companies Act, 1956. The industrial disputes raised by the appellant-Union pertain to the reinstatement of about 500 workmen who are the members of the appellant Union, who according to the appellant-Union were illegally and wrongfully terminated from service of the respondent No. 1 Company. The State Government by 5 different orders passed under section 12(5) read with section 10(1)(c) of the In...

Shri U.A. Thadani and Another Vs. B.E.S.T. Undertaking and Another

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2000Bom264; 2000(2)ALLMR266; 2000(3)BomCR79; (2000)2BOMLR502

ORDERR.M. Lodha, J.1. In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have challenged the legality, validity and propriety of the supplementary bills/debit notes issued by respondent No. 2 for the period 26-11-91 to 6-5-94 and for the period 7-3-94 to 29-3-94 (Exhibits 'B' and 'C' respectively) and notice of demand incorporated in bill dated 29-3-95 (Exhibit 'A to the writ petition). 2. The first petitioner is one of the partners of the 2nd petitioner firm. The 1st respondent is Bombay Electricity Supply and Transport Undertaking of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay. The 1st respondent supplies electricity to the consumers in the city of Bombay. The 2nd respondent is the Superintendent Consumer, BEST Undertaking who has issued the impugned debit notes. The petitioners have stated in the writ petition that prior to 1980 one Shri Fakir Mohd. Hussien & Co. was conducting the theater Ganesh Talkies. The said firm transferred the said the...

Mohammed Salim Yusuf Baig and Another Vs. MomIn Pada Yakub Baig Trust ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2000(3)ALLMR118; 2000(3)BomCR210; (2000)1BOMLR746

ORDERT.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. Rule. Returnable forthwith. By consent heard the parties.2. The petitioners challenge the order of the lower Court in Civil Misc. Application No. 110/98 wherein the Court below found that they are unfit or rather disqualified to be appointed as trustees of the Trust known as Momin Pada Yakub Baig Trust at Panvel. A scheme had been framed by the District Judge of Kolaba on 16th July 1996 whereby the total number of trustees was restricted to 5. Out of this, three trustees are to be appointed from each of the branches of the settlor's family, namely, each from branches of his three sons, Ahmed Baig, Usman Baig and Yusuf Baig. The remaining two trusteesshall be chosen from the persons belonging to Sunni Hanafi Muslim Jamat. The petitioner's candidature to be appointed as the members of the branches of the settlor's son has been rejected by the Court below on the ground that their fathers are in possession of C.T.S. No. 895 of the trust, situated at Panv...

M/S. Niton Industries Vs. the Union of India and Others

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2000(1)ALLMR491; 2000(3)BomCR212; (2000)1BOMLR697; [2000(85)FLR536]; (2000)ILLJ1518Bom; 2000(3)MhLj104

ORDERDr. Pratibha Upasani, J.1. Both these appeals are directed against the common judgment and order dated 10th April, 1994 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in the above mentioned writ petitions.2. The above mentioned writ petitions were filed by M/s. Niton Industries, a partnership firm registered under the provisions of the Indian Partnership Act, being aggrieved by the order passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Maharashtra and Goa dated 23rd September, 1992, in the matter of proceedings under section 7-A of the Employee's Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 ('the Act'), against Inventa Valve Industries (Bombay) Private Limited, MH/21449.3. To understand the controversy in the matter, few facts are required to be stated, which are as follows:Inventa Valve Industries (Bombay) Private Limited (respondent No. 3) was a covered establishment under the Act, under Code No.MH/21449. The Department had sought compliance from the establishment...

Shyamlal Rakeshkumar Shukla and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2000(5)BomCR638; 2000BomCR(Cri)638

ORDERP.V. Kakade, J.1. Four life convicts have preferred this Appeal against the judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay in Sessions Case No. 1364 of 1993 wherein they were convicted for offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to life imprisonment and were also directed to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- each. They came to be acquitted of the charge under section 148 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The facts involved in the Appeal in nutshell are thus :On 26th August, 1993, at about 9.45 a.m. the Goregaon Police Station received a message from the Control Room that a person by name Yadaya Kistya Pancham was murdered near N.K. Industries at Goregaon. After making the necessary diary entry, the officers, went to the spot and found thebody on the first floor of a building under construction. At the site, the police came across one Babu Pancham, the brother of the deceased, who informed the police ...