Mumbai Court July 2001 Judgments

Shantanu Baburao Palaskhedkar Vs. Vinayak Mahadeo Sainkar

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2002(1)ALLMR731; 2002(4)BomCR210; (2002)1BOMLR524; 2002(1)MhLj262

1. This writ petition, under Article 227 of theConstitution of India, takes exception to the order passed by the 5thAdditional District Judge, Pune dated August 8, 1989 in Civil Appeal No. 201of 1986.2. The petitioner is a tenant in respect of the suit premises bearing House No. 497, Ravivar Peth, Pune 411 011, which was originally owned by Vinayak Mahadeo Sainkar, predecessor of the present respondent. The original respondent had filed a suit for recovery of possession of the suit premises against the petitioner on the ground of default within the meaning of Section 12 of the Bombay Rent Act; as well as for the petitioner having committed acts contrary to the provisions of Clause (o) of Section 108 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882; unlawfully subletting the suit premises within the meaning of Section 13(1)(e) of the Rent Act; and not using the suit premises without reasonable cause for the purpose for which they were let for continuous period of 6 months immediately preceding the dat...

Vinaykumar Kachrulal Abad Vs. Honourable Minister, Revenue and Forest ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2002(1)MhLj854

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Perused the records.2. The following questions arise for determination in this petition :(1) Who is the competent authority under Section 257 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (hereinafter called as 'the Code') to hear and decide the revision application when the same is filed before the State Government? (2) Whether the application of the principles of natural justice, particularly, in relation to hearing of the parties by the revisional authority is excluded while disposing the revision application under Section 257 of the Code? (3) What is the scope of powers of the appellate authority under the code while considering the application for relief in appeal arising from an order permitting Non-Agricultural use of land? Whether it includes power to impose restrictions against alienation of the land which is the subject matter of the grant of permission for Non...

Vithal A. Shetty and anr. Vs. Assessor and Collector, Kalyan Dombivli ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2001Bom407; 2001(4)BomCR305

ORDER1. Leave to amend granted.2. The petitioners in this writ petition are the Presidents of the Hotel Owners Association, Dombivli, and of Hotel Owners Assocatlon, Kalyan. They have challenged the Circular dated 16th March, 2001 issued by the Respondent-Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation issued pursuant to the resolution of the Corporation whereunder a decision has been taken that the water supply bills pertaining to the period 1st October, 2000 to 31st March, 2001 shall be on the basis of minimum rates prescribed. A translated copy of the aforesaid Resolution has been placed before us, and in this writ petition, the petitioners are aggrieved by the rates prescribed for non-residential and commercial consumption under Heads F-1 and F-2, which read as follows :--CustomersRatesF- 1 , Beer Bars & Permit Rooms & Country BarsMinimumRs. 2,500/- per monthRs. 30/- per cubic metreF-2Restaurants (Gradewise)a) Minimum Rs. 2500/-permonthRs. 30/- per public metre b) Minimum Rs. 1500/-per month...

Kesar Enterprises Ltd. Vs. Idi Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2002]112CompCas174(Bom); [2003]42SCL99(Bom)

R.J. Kochar, J.1. The petitioners have prayed for an order of winding up of the respondent-company under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, alleging failure on the part of the respondents to pay off the debt to the tune of Rs. 20,57,600.66 as computed in the particulars of claim of the petition and interest thereon. From the averments in the petition, it appears that there was a contract between the parties to allow the respondent-company to store its material at the storage terminal of the petitioner at Kandla, Gujarat. The petitioners had agreed to extend the storing and handling facility to the respondent-company for its products on the terms and conditions which werereduced in writing in the agreement dated January 22, 1986. According to the petitioners, the respondent-company has failed and neglected to pay to the petitioner the storage charges for three periods, viz., September, 1995, to November, 1996, for an amount of Rs. 7,20,252 ; from June, 1998 to July, 1998, ...

Bhika Narayan Gangurde and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2002(1)BomCR186

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Perused the records.2. The petitioners challenge the judgment and order dated 17th October, 2000 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Nashik Division, Nashik in Appeal No. VP/A/84/2000. By the impugned judgment, the Additional Commissioner while allowing the appeal, had set aside the order dated 17th August, 2000 passed by the Additional Collector, Dhule in Gram Panchayat Dispute No. 18/2000 as well as the resolution of no confidence motion stated to have been passed in the meeting of Bhadane Gram Panchayat held on 10th July, 2000.3. The facts in brief, relevant for the decision are that the notice relating to no confidence motion against the respondent No. 6 herein, who is Sarpanch of the said village Panchayat, was served upon the Tahsildar of Sakri by some of the members of the Panchayat on 5th July, 2000. Pursuant to the notice issued in respect of the said no confidence motion, the meeting was convened on 10t...

N.R.C. Limited Vs. N.R.C. Employees' Union

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2002)104BOMLR755

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. The workman, the termination of whose services, gives rise to these proceedings, was employed on 4th October, 1982 by the Petitioner. The workman was assigned to the Purchase Department at the time of termination, and was a Stenographer. A charge-sheet was issued on 7th December, 1993 in which a disciplinary enquiry was proposed to be held on the charge of habitual absence. The allegations in the charge-sheet were : (i) from the month of May, 1993, the workman had remained absent unauthorisedly without sanction of leave on 13 occasions consisting of 14 full days and 4 half days; (ii) the workman had remained unauthorisedly absent on days prefixed or suffixed to holidays and even the days of unauthorised absence for half a day were on Monday morning as a result of which the work of the employer was adversely affected; (iii) the workman was continuously absent for one week between 11th and 15th October, 1993 on the ground of an alleged illness and the medical certi...

Super Soaps (Goa) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The common question for consideration in these two appeals is the value for assessment of the soap manufactured by Super Soap (Goa) Pvt.Ltd. The appellant entered into a contract with Hindustan Leaver ltd.for converting into cakes of toilet soap the noodles that the company manufactured, and return to it, for which it received agreed remuneration. In the order in appeal E/1661/97, the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the finding of the Assistant Commissioner that the assessable value of the soap would be the price at which Hindustan Lever Ltd. sold it to its dealers. The notice proposed that by application of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ujagar Prints vs.Union of India 1989 (39) ELT 493, the assessable value should be the price at which Hindustan Lever sold the soap.2. The Commissioner has based his conclusion on the decision of the Tribunal in Pawan Biscuits Company (Pvt.) Ltd. vs. CCE 595. In that decision, the Tribunal found that, having regard to the extent of contr...

Prime Tools Company, Kamlesh Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application by Prime Tools Company is for waiver of deposit of Rs. 56,801/- and penalty of equivalent amount. The applications by the other two individuals, who are directors of Vaishnav Screw Manufacturing Company Pvt. Ltd., (Vaishnav for short) are for waiver of deposit of penalties of Rs. 25,000/- each.2. The notice issued to the applicants demanded duty on the ground that the goods cleared by Vaishnav were actually manufactured, not by it, but by Prime Tools Company, and proposed penalties on Kamlesh Mehta and Rohit Shah, its two directors, on this ground. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner has dropped the demand on this score and confirmed the demand on the ground that the value of clearances of Prima Tools Company exceeded the limit of Rs. 30 lakhs specified in notification 1/90. He has, however, still chosen to impose penalties on the directors.3. There is thus prima facie no basis for imposition of penalty on these two persons who are unconnected with...

Piramal Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd., Mumbai Vs. Rashtriya Mill Maz ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2001(91)FLR536]; 2002(1)MhLj824

D.Y. Chandrachud, J. 1. On 25th December, 1999, an agreement was entered into between the petitioner and the respondent under Section 44(1) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 ('the BIR Act'). The Respondent is a representative Union of employees engaged in the Cotton Textile Industry for the local area of Greater Bombay under the provisions of the Act. The agreement between the parties commenced with a recital to the effect that the petitioner had been facing serious financial difficulties since 1998 due to a recession in demand coupled with the unavailability of finance. On 20th December, 1999, the petitioner had issued a notice of change under Section 42(1) of the BIR Act by which it had intended to discontinue the working of several departments situated in the Textile Mill of the petitioner situated at Lower Parel, Mumbai. Clause 1 of the agreement provides that the petitioner shall rationalise the employment strength at the unit at Lower Parel by offering a scheme of Volu...

John B. Braganza, Retired Section Officer of the High Court of Bombay ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2002(5)BomCR387

A.S. Aguiar, J.1. The petitioner herein seeks to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India to compel the respondents to pay him his pension and other retirement benefits along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum and for quashing and setting aside the communication dated 23rd August, 2000 by which communication a sum of Rs. 37,442/- is ordered to be recovered from the amount of commuted pension allegedly paid in excess.2. The petitioner herein, being in service on the establishment of this High Court, after completing 37 years of qualifying service, gave notice dated 17-3-1999 under Rule 65 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982 for voluntary retirement with effect from 1-7-1999. By letter dated 15-4-1999, the Additional Registrar, High Court, Bombay (Panaji Bench) required the petitioner to comply with certain formalities and the petitioner was informed by Memorandum dated 18-5-1999 that his application fo...