Mumbai Court March 2000 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.
Sombharti Guru Damu Bharti Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Bom352; 2000(3)ALLMR453; 2001(1)MhLj914
N.J. Pandya, Actg. C.J.1. We have earlier decided the reference in Writ Petition No. 159 of 1982. In the said reference, the question was confined to validity or otherwise of the action of the State Government to delegate its appellate powers to the Officer on Special Duty, under the provisions of Section 2A of the Hyderabad Abolition of Inams and Cash Grants Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act').2. We have answered the said reference against the Government holding that the quasi-judicial function of the State Government cannot be delegated in this manner. The reason which has weighed us is that the appeal is provided only in respect of decisions taken by Officer of the State, who is authorised to decide upon all or any of six questions set out in Sub-section (1) of Section 2A of the said Act. If the decision is taken by the State Government, there is no right of an appeal. On the other hand, if the decision is taken by the Officer so delegated, the appeal is to be hear...
Sheikh Mohamed Fatemohamed and Etc. Vs. RaisuddIn AzimuddIn Katil and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Bom353; 2000(3)ALLMR456; 2001(1)MhLj850
N.J. Pandya, A.C.J.1. With reference to the provisions of Hyderabad Abolition of Inams and Cash Grants Act, 1954 -- Section 2-A, (hereinafter, referred to as the 'said Act') an interesting question arose before the Division Bench of this Court on 31-1-1989. The said Act, as the name suggests, is enacted in keeping pace with the post independence exercise of the land reforms. As a part of that drive, various State Governments in the country were undertaking the exercise of abolition of different tenures and make a . simple ground reality by enabling the actual tiller to become an occupant, free from interference of so-called landlords, half of whom were absentee, making the occupant-tiller to till throughout his life for the benefit of that landlord. With this sort of expectation and to stop exploitation going over for centuries, the Statutes had to be enacted and one of such Statutes is the said Act.2. The balance had to be struck in the course of land reforms, that both the tiller and...
Dadasaheb Tukaram Gavade Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-2000
Reported in: 2001ALLMR(Cri)340; (2000)102BOMLR227
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. Through this appeal, the appellant challenges the Judgment and order dated 30.9.1995 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Satara in Sessions case No. 215 of 1994, whereby he has been convicted and sentenced in the manner stated hereinafter:(i) Under Section 302 of the I.P.C. to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 50O/- in default to undergo one month S.I.; and(ii) Under Section 504 of the I.P.C. to suffer one month R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- in default to undergo S.I. for 7 days.2. The prosecution case in short is as under:-On 25.7.1994 at about 9 p.m. Bhagwan P.W-2 along with his elder brother Raosaheb P.W. 5 went towards Bhairoba temple situated in village Shere, Taluka Karad, District Satara. At that time, their brother Vasant P.W. 3 was in his shop situated near the said temple. At the said time, the appellant, who was passing, came to worship in the temple. Bhagwan asked him as to why and whom he was abusing. Thereupon the appellan...
Arvindbhai Nyalchand Mehta Vs. Commissioner of Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-03-2000
Reported in: (2000)(72)ECC443
This appeal is filed by Arvindbhai Nyalchand Mehta against the above captioned impugned order dated 22-1-1999 praying for setting aside the same as department has not produced any evidence to show the seized ball and roller bearings are notified item, and they are smuggled goods, and release them and for such other relief as deemed fit.1. The brief facts of the case are that the residential and business premises and godown of appellant was searched at Rajkot on 16-1-1998 by the officers of Jamnagar Customs division, on the basis of intelligence collected. 8124 pieces of foreign origin of ball bearings were found in the business premises namely M/s. Ball bearings and Machinery Co. and 1289 pieces of source type was found in godown. Appellant could not produce any document or explain about the import of the above material as the owner of the above premises. Goods worth Rs. 1,07,294/- (from business premises) and Rs. 1,70,075/- (from godown) were seized, and kept in boxes for safe custod...
i.C.i.C.i. Limited Vs. Patheja Brothers Forgings and Stampings Limited ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-03-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)ALLMR46; 2000(3)BomCR330; (2000)2BOMLR567; 2000(3)MhLj121
ORDERS.H. Kapadia, J.1. On 16th July, 1999, the Central Government by notification established the Debt Recovery Tribunal under section 3 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. Consequent upon the said notification, all suits/proceedings pending before this Court involving claims of Rs. 10 lakhs and above stood transferred to the Debts Recovery Tribunal (hereinafter, for the sake of brevity, referred to as 'D.R.T.').2. After 16th July, 1999 in several proceedings before the Court receiver parties have challenged the right of the Court Receiver to manage the properties on the ground that in view of D.R.T. Act, 1993, the Court Receiver had no authority to act in the matter. Hence, the Court Receiver has moved this Court. Pursuant to notice, the above matters have come up for hearing.3. In the circumstances, the Court Receiver has moved this Court for adjudication of various points, which arise for determination consequent upon the above notification.4...
Ahmednagar Zilha Sahakari Dudh Vyavsaik Va Prakriya Sangh Ltd. Vs. Sta ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-03-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)ALLMR559; 2002(1)BomCR728
D.S. Zoting, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties and the learned Assistant Government Pleader. Leave to delete respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in Writ Petition No. 852 of 1999 is granted.2. Rule. Petitions are taken up for final hearing forthwith by consent of the parties.3. In Writ Petition No. 941 of 1999 the petitioners is Ahmednagar Zilla Sahakari Dugdha Vyavsaik Va Prakriya Sangh Limited (Ahmednagar Zilla Sangh. For Short), a registered Federal Co-operative Society at the District level under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act in the year 1958. Its area of operation covers seven Talukas in the Ahmednagar District namely Ahmednagar, Parner, Shrigondha, Karjat, Jamkhed, Pathardi and Sheogaon. Its Bylaws are duly approved by the competent authority and the Managing Committee consists of representatives from each one of these Talukas. It employs about 500 employees who are represented by a union registered under the Trade Unions Act. It has set up chilling plants in ...
Aspee Agro Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-02-2000
Reported in: (2001)(134)ELT139Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The common question for consideration in these three appeals is whether the parts of agricultural machinery classifiable under any of the Chapter Heading 84 of Central Excise Tariff would be entitled to Notification 64/86 for the period from 1-3-1986 to 13-3-1986.2. As it was issued on 1st March, 1986, Notification 64/86, exempted in Serial No. 2 of the Table attached to it agricultural implements and parts thereof falling under Chapter 82 of the Tariff from duty. On 14-3-1986 this notification was amended by including it in such goods of Chapter 84. Thus, from this date onwards, it exempted agricultural implements and parts thereof falling under Chapter 82 or Chapter 84 from duty.3 It is not in dispute that the goods, which are the subject matter of the appeal, were classifiable under Chapter 84 and were not classifiable under any heading of Chapter 82. The contention of representative of the appellant is that the Board has clarified in a Circular No. 44/94 CX, dated 27-6-1994 tha...
Galaxy Knives Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-02-2000
Reported in: (2000)(119)ELT88Tri(Mum.)bai
These appeals are by the party one preferred against the above captioned orders, dated 15-10-1986 and 20-3-1987, praying for quashing and setting aside the same with Annexure 'A' thereto with consequential relief, deemed fit.1. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant, claimed clearance of 6 pcs + 7 BDLs containing alloy steel bars Jalarghni Wladyslawowo, sent by M/s. Galaxy Knives Pvt. Ltd., Bombay, valued at Rs. 11,02,4697- FOB under Bill of Entry No.,1604/95 (2) 1528/87 presented self No. 11/196, against the Import Licence P/D/2249679/C/XX/94/B/94, dated 4-5-1985 under OGL is not valid on goods imported Tool and Dye Steel are covered by Entry No. 19 of Appendix 3B, requiring a valid import licence.2. In C/388/95 same appellant imported 10 bundles of Alloy Steel Bars, Alloy Tool Steel of 9.431 MTs OF Rs. 3,03,634/- Bill of Entry No.2860/152/SS Dhavalagiri CHA 11/196 and sought clearance against import licence No. 1069501/C/C1XX/95/B/94, dated 10-4-1995 which was issued in ...
Commissioner of Customs Vs. Maruti Udyog Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-02-2000
Reported in: (2000)(119)ELT83Tri(Mum.)bai
1. M/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd., the respondent to this appeal, filed on 28-4-1995 five bills of entry in Kandla Custom House, which were noted in the import department, and the rotation numbers, in accordance with the normal procedure, allotted. Subsequently, by letter, dated 1-5-1995, the Assistant Collector informed the importer that the bills of lading which were submitted with the bills of entry were unsigned and that therefore the bills of entry should not have been noted. It was stated that this noting was cancelled and the importer was advised to furnish bills of entry along with bills of lading duly signed by the appropriate person. The respondent filed fresh bills of entry with the signed bills of lading on 4-5-1995 and 8-5-1995. By this time the exchange rate for the Japanese yen which was the currency in which the invoice was prepared had altered to the disfavour of the importer. The Custom House applied the exchange rate prevailing on 4-5-1995 and 8-5-1995 and duty was assessed...
Velmor Home Decor Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-02-2000
Reported in: (2000)(119)ELT614Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The common question for consideration in these appeals is the eligibility during the period from 1st April, 1992 to 21st May, 1992 to the benefit of 175/86 of the goods manufactured by each of these appellant. In the two orders impugned in these appeals the Commissioner (Appeals) has, on an application filed under Section 35E(4) of the Act, accepted the stand of the department that the assessee was not entitled to the benefit, and over-ruled the orders of the lower authorities.2. We have heard Shri P.B. Ranadive for the appellant M/s. Velmor Home Docor Pvt. Ltd. appellant M/s. Reliable Cans is absent and unrepresentative and has requested decision on merits of the submissions in the appeal.3. The relevant paragraph 4 of the notification and the second proviso under this paragraph as it stood on 1-4-1992 are reproduced below: "The exemption contained in this notification shall be applicable only to a factory which is an undertaking registered with the Director of Industries in any S...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »