Mumbai Court August 2001 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.
Yusuf KamruddIn MomIn Vs. U.R. Kulkarni, Supdt., Central Excise and Cu ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-01-2001
Reported in: 2001ALLMR(Cri)1795; (2001)4BOMLR285
S.S. Parkar, J. 1. The appellant convicted and sentenced under the provisions of N.D.P.S. Act has preferred this appeal challenging the order of conviction and sentence recorded against him by the Special Court, under N.D.P.S. Act, Pune in N.D.P.S. Sessions Case No. 29 of 1993 by Judgment and Order dated 4.1.1999. 2. Briefly, the prosecution case is as follows : On the basis of prior information the officers of Central Excise and Customs, Preventive Branch had searched the house of the appellant on 11.10.1987 under a search warrant. During the course of the search 430 gms. of Ganja was found kept in one german pot in his house along with empty packets of brown colour. Thereafter personal search of the appellant was taken and from the pocket of his trouser 230 gms. of Opium was recovered. The raiding party had with them the panchas. The sample packets of 5 gms. each were prepared from both the contraband. The contraband was seized under Seizure Panchanama Exh. 17. The accused was brough...
Pralhad Banduji Lodhi Vs. the Collector and the District Magistrate an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-01-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Bom416; 2002(1)ALLMR112; (2001)4BOMLR584; 2001(3)MhLj812
V.C. Daga, J. 1. This revision Is directed against the judgment and order dated 24th October, 1997 passed by the Fourth Additional District Judge, Pune In Misc. Civil Appeal No. 549 of 1993 arising out of judgment and decree dated 27th September, 1993 passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune in Regular Civil Suit No. 481 of 1991; whereby the petitioner was held to be a person not belonging to nomadic tribe was confirmed. Issue 2. The short question that arises for consideration under section 9 ofCivil Procedure Code, 1908 ('C.P.C:' for short) Is as to whether the CivilCourt has Jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit challenging the orderdirecting cancellation of caste certificate Issued in favour of the petitioner.The operative part of the order Having heard the parties at length, this revision was dismissed on 7th June, 2001 for the reasons to be recorded subsequently. I accordingly, give my reasons for dismissing this revision. The reasons are based on following fa...
Solanki Vipul Devjibhai Vs. University of Mumbai and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-01-2001
Reported in: (2002)2BOMLR145; 2002(1)MhLj390
1. The University of Mumbai, detected the use of unfair means during the course of the examination in the subject of Machine Design-I for the Seventh Semester of the Degree Course of Bachelor of Engineering in Mechanical Engineering. The University convened an Unfair Means Enquiry Committee to investigate into the allegations against the students involved. They are the petitioners before the Court in the five writ petitions. The Unfair Means Enquiry Committee came to the conclusion after an enquiry in which the students participated that the use of unfair means had been established. Final orders were passed by the University. The students concerned have been informed that their performance in the examination has treated as null and void. Besides this four students who are the petitioners before the Court in Writ Petitions Nos. 1249, 1250, 1252 and 1253 of 2001 stand debarred from appearing at any examination of the University or College till the end of the first half of the year 2001. ...
Shaukat Adam Malim Vs. Kokan Mercantile Co-operative Bank Ltd., Mumbai ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-01-2001
Reported in: [2003(96)FLR221]; 2002(1)MhLj760
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. In these proceedings, the petitioner impugns an order of the Industrial Court dated 2nd September, 1997 passed in revision in an Application under section 44 of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 ('the B.I.R. Act').2. The petitioner was appointed as an Accounts Clerk by the first respondent which is a Co-operative Bank registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. In 1975, the petitioner was appointed to the post of Senior Officer, Grade-I and on 12th February, 1985, came to be posted as Branch Manager at the Central Office Branch, where the Head Office of the Bank is located. On 2nd January, 1991, a chargesheet was issued to the petitioner setting out that in violation of the directives issued by the Reserve Bank of India, the petitioner had been found to be extending facilities to customers of the Bank beyond 10% of the sanctioned limit. As a result, the Board of Directors had curtailed the powers of Branch Manager to limit such faci...
Standard Chartered Bank Vs. A.B.F.S.L. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-01-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)ALLMR419; (2001)4BOMLR520
S.K. Kapadia, J.REASONS FOR THE RULING DATED 31ST JULY, 2001 ON THE QUESTION WHETHER THE REPORT OF JPC IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT 1. Learned Counsel for Can Bank Mutual Fund tenders the Report of JPC. Mr. Cooper for Standard Chartered Bank objects. The matter was argued threadbare. Two points arise for determination. Firstly, whether the Report of Joint Parliamentary Committee is a public document as defined under Section 74 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Secondly, even if it is a public document, whether the findings of the Joint Parliamentary Committee constitute evidence as defined under Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act.ARGUMENTS 2. Mr. Harish Salve, Solicitor General of India contended that the Report of the Joint Parliamentary Committee, (hereinafter referred to as 'JPC'), is the Report of the Parliament. That, JPC consisted of the members of both Houses of Parliament. That, the entire object of the Report was to keep the Parliament informed of the events which took place and the...
Arun Dharma Chavhan Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-01-2001
Reported in: 2001ALLMR(Cri)2320; 2002BomCR(Cri)30; (2002)104BOMLR248
P.V. Hardas, J.1. On 14.1.1994, Pravin s/o Kavdu Rathod, above of 8 years, was last seen in the company of the present appellant at about 3.30 to 4.00 p.m. and thereafter he was not seen alive. Frantic efforts of his parents and villagers of Tiwasla in Yavatmal District proved futile. Ultimately on 18.1.1994, his dead body was exhumed, at the instance of the appellant, from a pit in an agricultural field. On the allegations that the present appellant had committed the murder of deceased Pravin, the appellant was convicted by the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Yavatmal and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500.00 for an offence punishable under Section 364 R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs. 500.00 and for an offence punishable under Section 201 R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs. 200.00. It is this conviction and sentence passed by the learned Trial Court in Sessions Trial No. 150/1994, that is assailed before us in the present appeal.2. The sequence of events which...
- ‹ Prev
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- Next ›