Mumbai Court September 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.
Vilas Shankarrao Deshmukh and anr. Vs. S.A. Ghode, Principal, Navprabh ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-08-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)ALLMR463; 2001(2)BomCR116; (2000)IIILLJ139Bom; 2001(1)MhLJ261
A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. This contempt petition has been filed under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, for non-compliance of the directions issued by the School Tribunal on October 30, 1998. The School Tribunal by the said order directed the Respondents to reinstate the Petitioners within 30 days from the date of order and to pay all the salary from the date of alleged termination till the Petitioners resumes duty, within 60 days. The School Tribunal further directed that if the Management fails to make the payment within 60 days, Respondent No. 3, the Deputy Director of Education be informed to deduct the amount from the grants of the Respondent School. After the said decision, it is stated, that the Petitioners approached the Respondents and called upon them to comply with the said directions. Since the directions were not complied with, the Petitioners eventually gave notice dated February 22, 1999 to the Respondents. It is stated in para 5 of the petition that although the Pet...
Shobha Kashinath Bhavaskar Vs. Returning Officer for the Election of G ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-08-2000
Reported in: 2001(3)BomCR168
A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. Mr. Saboo, the learned Counsel for the respondent No. 2, has raised a preliminary objection that this revision is filed against the order passed by the Court below dismissing Election Petition, while allowing preliminary objection raised on behalf of respondent No. 2, and as such revision application is not maintainable. The learned Counsel for the applicant makes oral request for treating this revision application as writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Both the Counsel for the respondents have no objection if the said prayer is allowed and the hearing of the matter is proceeded as if this is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The statements made by the Counsel are accepted. This revision application is treated as writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. Rule. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith. Heard both sides.3. By this writ petition, order passed by Mr. R.B. Mhashakhetri, Civil Ju...
Tribhovandas Bhimji Zaveri Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax and a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-08-2000
Reported in: (2001)163CTR(Bom)508
S. H. Kapadia, J.Since the above two appeals arise from common orders of the Tribunal, the same are disposed of together by this common judgment.2. Being aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal, directing the addition of Rs. 1,53,02,226 for the assessment year 1988-89, this appeal has been filed under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the assessee.Facts3. The assessee is a partnership-firm. It is engaged in the business of dealing in bullion, gold and jewellery. For the assessment year 1988-89, it filed it's returns declaring an income of Rs. 33,18,400. The assessee claimed that in the year of acccount, relevant for the assessment year 1988-89, it had purchased gold ornaments of Rs 1,53,02,226 weighing 58.803 kgs. from the partners of the firm and their family members. In other words, gold ornaments were purchased from 18 individuals, out of which 5 were the partners of the firm and the remaining 13 are their family members. In the audit report furnished under section 44AB...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Bharatkumar Modi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-08-2000
Reported in: [2001]113TAXMAN386(Bom)
Kapadia, J. Since the above appeals raise common question of law and fact, they are disposed of together by this common judgment.2. The short question which arises for determination in this appeal is as follows :'Whether, the Tribunal erred in annulling the assessments on the ground that the assessing officer had decided the matter without making relevant enquiries and without confronting the assessees with all the material against the assessees (i.e., on the ground of violation of the rules of natural justice) ?' 3. To decide the above question, briefly, the facts are required to be stated.4. In appeal No. 127 of 2000, the assessee filed return of income for the assessment year 1993-94. The total income included agricultural income of Rs. 64,90,951 which was taken for aggregation for rate purpose. The return of income declared total income of Rs. 3,63,400. During the assessment years 1991-92 and 1992-93, investigations were carried out. The farmers and Tahsildar were examined to ascer...
Jayaram Sakharam Pachore and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)ALLMR179; 2001(1)BomCR245; (2001)2BOMLR587; 2000(4)MhLj255
ORDERB.H. Marlapalle, J.1. This petition has challenged the vires of Sections 73G(2B), 73A, 73IB and 77A(3) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (for short, the Act) and prayed for other consequential reliefs, including the continuation of the managing committee in office without being superseded or replaced by an Administrator till their elections are held and the newly elected body resumes office. On 2nd August, 1999 a Division Bench of this Court (Barde and Mhase, JJ.), while issuing notice before admission, granted ad Interim relief in terms of prayer clause (F) and also clarified that the petitioner would be at liberty to move the State Government as per the provisions of section 73G(2) of the Act with an application for extension of the managing committee's tenure. Prayer clauses (F) reads, thus :'(F) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the present writ petition, grant an injunction restraining the respondent Nos. 1 to 3, their offices, agents, servants or an...
Pix Transmission Limited Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-2000
Reported in: [2001(88)FLR720]; (2000)IIILLJ202Bom
A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. Rule. By consent, Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard both the sides.2. The only issue which arises for consideration in this case is that after the Failure Report was submitted by the Conciliation Officer on December 22, 1997 to the Government of Maharashtra, subsequent thereto, settlements outside the conciliation took place between the petitioner and the workmen of petitioner Company, through respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5-Unions, on May 4, 1998, July 4, 1998 and December 7, 1998, under Section 2(p) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Although the abovesaid events were placed before the appropriate authority, the appropriate authority, before issuing the order of reference on July 12, 1999, has obviously not taken, those relevant facts into account to address itself to the issue as to whether there was any subsisting industrial dispute which was required to be referred for enquiry to the Industrial Court. From plain reading of the order of reference dated July ...
Onkar Moatiram Kale and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-2000
Reported in: 2001(5)BomCR297; 2001CriLJ4375
R.K. Batta, J.1. The appellants have been convicted for murder of Ramkrishna under section 302 read with 34 I.P.C., for causing grievous hurt with dangerous weapon to Nirmala P.W. 2 under section 326 read with 34 I.P.C. For the offence of murder, they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life, for offence under section 326 read with 34 I.P.C., they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 2000/- in default R.I., for one year each. Though they have been held guilty for voluntarily causing hurt to P.W. 2 Nirmala under section 324 read with 34 I.P.C., yet no separate sentence has been imposed. In addition, appellants No. 3 to 5 have also been convicted for causing grievous hurt to Manohar P.W. 5 under section 325 read with 34 I.P.C. and the said appellants have been sentenced to R.I. for 2 years. Out of the fine recovered, a sum of Rs. 15,000/- has been ordered to be paid to Nirmala P.W. 2 as compensation. The period of detent...
Gujarat State Fertilizers and Vs. C.C.E. and C.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-2000
Reported in: (2000)(121)ELT729Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This ROM application has been filed by the applicant making the following prayers : (a) To grant a personal hearing before disposing of this humble petition. (b) to recall the Final Order No. C.II/1897-98/2000 WZB dated 5-7-2000. (c) to rectify the mistakes apparent on record as may be deemed fit, proper and legal and (d) to grant any other suitable relief and remedy as may be deemed fit in the interest of justice and in accordance with Jaw.2. From the above, it will be clear that one of the prayers is to recall the order made by this Bench on 23-6-2000. By our order dated 23-6-2000 certified on 5-7-2000, we had held in Application E/Misc-117/2000 in Appeal E/228/2000 as follows: "This is an application for early hearing by the respondent assessee. In the appeal the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Vadodara, has filed an appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise and Customs, whereunder, the Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the assesse...
Bell Ceramics Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-2000
Reported in: (2000)(122)ELT396Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Today, the application for stay has been listed for hearing. When the matter was looked into, it was felt that the appeal itself could be disposed of as it lies in a narrow compass. Hence, with the consent of both the sides and after waiving the pre-deposit, this was done.2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Ceramic tiles falling under Chapter heading 6906.10 of the Central Excise Tariff Act.They were also availing Modvat credit.3. Sometime in October, 1997, the officers of the Department carried out physical verification. The verification was started, according to the ld. counsel, at 5 p.m. continued till 5 a.m. on the following day.The checks were carried out by the officers without sufficient help from the workers of the factory in a poorly illuminated condition. The bonded store room which was used for storage of material had several stocks of more than 60,000 sq. m. of tiles. Shri J.C. Patel, the ld.counsel vehemently argues that the verification of the stock co...
A. Joan of Arc Vs. the Managing Trustees of Thiruvalluvar Manram's Cha ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)BomCR379
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. Leave to amend the petition to make the State of Maharashtra and Director of Education as a party. Amendment to be carried out within one week. 2. The petitioner has been employed with respondent No. 2 as a clerk since 9-3-1984. The grievance of the petitioner was that no appointment letter was given to her even after 13 years of service. Respondent No. 2 was at the material time recognised by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay under the provisions of the Grant-in-Aid-Code, as a primary school. The grievance of the petitioner is that though one of the conditions of recognition under Rule 5(6) of the Grant-in-Aid-Code is that the pay scales and other conditions of service should be such as laid down by the Education Department, the petitioner was not allowed the benefit of the pay scales which had been thus fixed. 3. This petition came to be filed on 23-10-1997 in which the principal relief sought was that respondent No. 1 should be directed to pay to the...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »