Mumbai Court April 2000 Judgments
Shri Ramesh Sudam Sonar Vs. Arjun Rambhau Khandekar and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-27-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)BomCR31
ORDERR. J. Kochar, J.1. The petitioner was an employer of the deceased respondent who is now represented in the present litigation under the Workmens' Compensation Act by the legal heirs and representatives and who had filed a claim for workmens' compensation against the petitioner on account of death of the deceased arising out of accident during the course of his employment with the petitioner. The legal heirs had claimed an amount of Rs. 1 lakh from the petitioner. It appears from the record that the petitioner and his Advocate both were absent and passed an ex parte order on 20th December 1991 directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 1 lakh as compensation to the applicants/respondent Nos. 1 to 3. It further appears that the petitioner having come to know that an ex parte order was passed against him, he filed an application for setting aside the said order. He also filed subsequently an application for condonation of delay in filing such an application. It also appears that th...
Tag this Judgment!Nazir Abdul Karim Shaikh Vs. Pimpari Chinchwad Municipal Transport Cor ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-27-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)ALLMR679; 2000(4)BomCR436; [2001(89)FLR636]; 2000(4)MhLj479
ORDERR.J. Kochar, J.1. The petitioner was employed by the respondent Corporation as a Conductor and was confirmed in service with effect from 4th December 1979. His service record appears to be not satisfactory in respect of his attendance. It is borne out from the record that he remained unauthorisedly absent from 1-1-1984 to 30th March 1984 and for second time from 1-12-1984 to 8-3-1985. By a show cause notice dated 19th March 1985, the petitioner was called upon to explain his absence of 98 days which was without prior intimation and without sanction. The petitioner was calledupon to show cause why he should not be treated as having lost lien over the employment under the standing orders for having remained absent unauthorisedly for more than 10 days. In the said show cause notice it was also clearly mentioned in Marathi that he should remain present before the enquiry along with whatever documents in support of his case he had. He was also made aware that he should submit his expla...
Tag this Judgment!Janseve Dudh Utpadak Sahakari Society Ltd. Vs. Bhausaheb Dattu Pharne ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-27-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)BomCR442; 2000(3)MhLj850
ORDERR.J. Kochar, J.1. The petitioner claims to be a small co-operative milk society at village level. The present respondents who are contesting the matter are the legal heirs and representatives of the deceased workman who appears to have expired during the pendency of the lis. It is the case of the petitioner society that the deceased workman was an elected member of the managing committee of the petitioner and was holding the post of Vice Chairman. By a resolution dated 1st October 1980 he got himself appointed as Secretary of the petitioner after resigning from the managing committee of the society. He was working as Secretary from 1st October 1980 till 5th October 1982. It is further the case of the petitioner that in the year 1982, the Government Auditor had submitted his report recording serious act of defalcation and misappropriation of an amount to the tune of Rs. 30,000/- by the deceased workman during his tenure as the Secretary of the petitioner. It appears that a show cau...
Tag this Judgment!The Divisional Controllers, Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporati ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-27-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)BomCR505; [2000(86)FLR187]; 2000(3)MhLj827
ORDERR.J. Kochar, J. 1. The petitioners are the two Divisional Controllers of the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation which is duly constituted under the provisions of the State Road Transport Corporation. It is established to provide public transport facilities through out the State of Maharashtra and elsewhere.2. The respondent was employed as a driver with the petitioner at Pune division. On 7-10-1987 he reported for duty at about 2300 hrs. when it was found and noticed that he had consumed alcohol and was under its influence. He also behaved in an indecent and riotous manner with the Controllers as well as being under the influence of liquor he was not in a state of mind to head advice to stop his indecent and disorderly and riotous behaviour on the premises of the petitioner Corporation. As a consequence thereof he was handed over to the police. He was also sent to hospital for medical examination. I may mention here, to complete the link of the narration, that he was on ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Krishnabai C. Kadam and Others Vs. Wellworth Developers and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-27-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Bom9; 2000(4)ALLMR200; 2000(4)BomCR757; 2000(4)MhLj532
ORDERH.L. Gokhale, J. 1. This Chamber Summons has been taken out by defendant Nos. 1 to 4 in this suit seeking striking out of a part of the plaint and also seeking a direction to the plaintiffs to elect between some of the prayers made in the plaint. 2. Mr. Anil Divan, learned Senior Counsel with Mr. Shyam Divan, have appeared for defendant Nos. 1 to 4 in support of this Chamber Summons whereas Mr. Dwarkadas, learned Senior Counsel with Mr. Samdani have appeared for the plaintiffs to show cause as to why this Chamber Summons should not be granted. 3. Before I deal with the prayers in the Chamber Summons, it is necessary to refer to the factual aspect of the controversy between the parties leading to this Chamber Summons. This suit has been filed by one Smt. Krishnabai C. Kadam (plaintiff No. 1) who is the widow of one Chandrarao Kadam, who died in Mumbai on 23rd August 1995 at the age of about 91 years. The other plaintiffs to the suit are the heirs of Chandrarao Kadam. Defendant No. ...
Tag this Judgment!Anil Tulshiram Walare Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-27-2000
Reported in: (2000)102BOMLR399
P.V. Kakade, J.1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 28th November, 1995, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik, in Sessions Case No. 140 of 1993, wherein the appellant was convicted for commission of offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for murder of his wife and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of l. 000/-, in default to undergo further imprisonment for three months.2. The facts involved in the present case, in brief are thus:-The appellant was married to deceased Indubai and they were living together at village Lakhalgaon in District Nashik. The appellant's brother Eknath was also residing in the neighbourhood with his family members. In the evening, at about 6.00 or 6.30 p.m. on 22nd March, 1995, deceased Indubai was at home along with the appellant, at which time, appellant's niece came to the deceased Indubai and told her that she was called by Eknath and his wife Chandrabhagabai....
Tag this Judgment!Chief Officer, Sangli Municipal Council Vs. Assistant Commissioner of ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)BomCR862
ORDERR.J. Kochar, J.1. The petitioner is the Chief Officer of Sangli Municipal Council, Sangli and the respondent Nos. 2 to 29 and 31 to 32 are its employees.2.Pursuant to a settlement dated 20-8-1984 the employees were entitled to get Leave Travel Allowance at the rate mentioned therein. The said clause in settlement is reproduced below:'Leave Travel Allowance :- It is agreed by the Sangli Municipal Council to.pay Leave Travel Allowance at the rate to the categorise as mentionedbelow once in two years :- (i)Employees drawing basic pay upto Rs. 500/- p.m.Rs. 300/-(ii)Employees drawing basic pay between Rs. 510/- and Rs. 750/- p.m.Rs. 450/-(iii)Employees drawing basic pay above Rs. 750/- p.m.Rs. 600/-This terms shall come in force w.e.f. 1-1-1984. The allowance shall be payable only after leave travel is sanctioned and on production of travelling bills.'It appears that the respondent employees filed an application under section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 praying to the...
Tag this Judgment!Kifayatullah Haji Gulam Rasool and Others Vs. Smt. Bilkish Ismail Mehs ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Bom424; 2000(4)ALLMR431; 2000(4)BomCR412; 2000(4)MhLj341
ORDERVijay Daga, J.1. The petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under sections 14 and 15 read with section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('Act and short')2. In this petition, the petitioners have initially prayed for the following main reliefs.(a) that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to declare that pursuant to the agreement between the parties dated 27-3-1998 and 9-11-1988 as contemplated by sections 14 and 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as the time fixed for making and publishing the award within a period of two months from 9-11-1998 come to an and on 9-1-1999, and as contemplated by section 14 of the said Act since the arbitrators have failed to act without undue delay, the mandate of an arbitration stood terminated hence the arbitral proceedings have come to an end on 9-1-1999 and therefore the interim reliefs granted on 23-2-1998 have also come to an end.(b) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to declare that on account o...
Tag this Judgment!Nathu Mahadeo Nigade Vs. Pune Municipal Transport Corporation
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)ALLMR538; 2000(4)BomCR478; (2000)3BOMLR552; [2002(88)FLR248]
ORDERR. J. Kochar, J.1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Industrial Court, Maharashtra, Pune passed on 30th April, 1983 dismissing his complaint of unfair labour practice filed by him against the respondent Corporation to challenge his supersession in the matter of promotion from the post of conductor to the post of Assistant Time Keeper. His grievance in the said complaint was that though he was senior and was due for promotion in the year 1988, the respondent Nos. 2 to 8 though junior to him were promoted. His grievance also appears to be that he was a trade union activist and therefore, he was deliberately victimised and was not given promotion. The respondent Corporation denied the said allegations by filing its written statement before the Industrial Court. It is significant to note that though Items 4(a), (d) and (e) of Schedule II and Items 5 and 10 of Schedule IV of the MRTU & PULP Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) were invoked they have not been pressed b...
Tag this Judgment!Shramik Sena and Another Vs. M/S. Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Lt ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)ALLMR212; 2000(4)BomCR718; [2000(87)FLR769]; (2000)IILLJ1633Bom; 2000(4)MhLj315
ORDERDr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service. By consent, petition is taken up for final hearing. 2. The petitioner which is a registered Trade Union, has espoused the interest in these and in earlier proceedings of workers employed by the 1st respondent in a statutory canteen situated at the factory establishment at Nagothane. In the earlier proceedings, the writ petition filed by the Trade Union under Article 226 of the Constitution was allowed by a judgment and order of a Division Bench of this Court dated 29-8-1997. In Appeal, the Supreme Court, by a judgment and order dated 4-8-1999, affirmed the decision of this Court. Despite the Union having succeeded in the proceedings right upto the Supreme Court, the workers for whose benefit the proceedings came to be initiated, have still not been regularised. There are 134 workers whose livelihood is at issue and they have been in service continuously and uninterruptedly for over a decade. 3. The 1...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »