Mumbai Court October 2002 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.
R.A. Yadav and ors. Vs. Special Steels Ltd. and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-18-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)BomCR96; [2003(97)FLR542]
Radhakrishnan S., J.1. By this petition the petitioners employees are challenging the order dated 8-7-1997 passed by the Industrial Court in Revision application on (DLP) No. 117 of 1995 whereby the Industrial Court had allowed the revision application and had set aside the order dated 28-6-1995 passed by the III Labour Court, Thane in a complaint under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as, 'The Act, 1971') and the Industrial Court has held that the petitioners herein are not workmen within the meaning of section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as, 'The Act, 1947') and also within the meaning of section 3(5) of the Act, 1971.2. The petitioners herein have joined the services of respondent No. 1 as scrap inspectors during the years, 1980-81. It is the contention of the petitioners that they are 'workmen' within the meaning of section 2(s) of the Act, 1947 and also 'empl...
Nivrutti Marotrao Annapure Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-18-2002
Reported in: (2003)105BOMLR203
B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks a Writ of Mandamus against respondent No. 3 for payment of salary from January, 1989, till the date of oral termination i.e. 11.3.1991 with interest at the rate of 15%.2. The petitioner contends that he came to be appointed as Junior Clerk vide an order dated 29.6.1989 with effect from 1.1.1989 in the pay-scale of Rs. 950-1,500 by respondent No. 3. Resolution dated 26.6.1989 passed by respondent No. 3 regarding the said appointment has been placed on record and by letter dated 11.3.1991 the said management had purportedly sent recommendations to the Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad. Parbhani, seeking approval to the appointment of the petitioner on the basis of Resolution dated 26.6.1989. Admittedly, the Education Officer did not grant the approval to the appointment of the petitioner till the alleged date of oral termination or even when his Appeal No. 26 of 1992 was pending befor...
Mopac Plast Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-2002
Reported in: III(2003)BC443; 2003(1)MhLj523
A.M. Khanwildar, J.1. P.C.:--Leave to amend. Rule. Mrs. N. S. Don-Theba waives notice. Heard forthwith, by consent.2. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the order passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai dated August 20, 2002, in M. A, No. 234 of 2002 in Appeal No. 53 of 2002, which in turn will have the effect of confirming the order passed by thePresiding Officer of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune dated June, 26, 2002 in O. A. No. 535-P/2001. The Presiding Officer of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune, was to hear the original application for arguments on June 26, 2002. On that date a request was made on behalf of the petitioner that their advocate Smt. Kale was under medical treatment and advised rest for one month. No doubt besides Smt. Kale the petitioners had filed joint vakalatnama of one Advocate Gujar and he had appeared before the Tribunal on that day. The Tribunal proceeded with the hearing of the cas...
Mopac Plast (P.) Ltd. Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR524; III(2003)BC46; 2003(3)BomCR107; [2003]42SCL52(Bom)
ORDERA.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. Leave to amend. Rule, Mrs. N.S. Don-Theba waives notice. Heard forthwith, by consent.2. This writ petition under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the order passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai dated 20-8-2002, in M.A. No. 234 of 2002 in Appeal No. 53 of 2002, which in turn will have the effect of confirming the order passed by the Presiding Officer of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune dated 26-6-2002 in O.A. No. 535-P/2001. The Presiding Officer of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune, was to hear the original application for arguments on 26-6-2002. On that date a request was made on behalf of the petitioner that their advocate Smt. Kale was under medical treatment and advised rest for one month. No doubt besides Smt. Kale the petitioners had filed joint vakalatnama of one Advocate Gujar and he had appeared before the Tribunal on that day. The Tribunal proceeded with the hearing of the case on that date and ...
Balasaheb Keshav Thackeray Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)MhLj775
J.A. Patil, J.1. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 21st March, 1999 regarding issue of process by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Katol in Criminal Case No. 34 of 1998. The relevant facts in brief are as under :2. The petitioner is the chief of Shiv Sena, a political party and also the Chief Editor of Marathi daily, 'Samana' and two other papers. Respondent No. 2 is the original complainant who filed the above mentioned case against the petitioner on 20-3-1998 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Katol for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 500, 504, 505 and 171F and 171G of the Indian Penal Code. Respondent No. 2 claims to be the President of Yuvak Congress Committee, District Nagpur (Rural). In his complaint, respondent No. 2 has alleged that on 7-2-1998 the petitioner held a public meeting ...
Mohammed Sadiq Abdul Khalil Patel and Five ors. Vs. Shri V.Y. Choughul ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)116; 2003(2)BomCR760a; 2003(4)MhLj825
J.G. Chitre, J. 1. The petitioners are hereby assailing correctness, propriety and legality of the order dated 4/1/1995 passed by the Special Executive Magistrate, Thane, Division Thane, by which the petitioners have been directed to execute personal bond in the sum of Rs. 2000/-, for uncertain period of time. After perusing the said order, it is obvious that the order is nothing but a cyclostyled sheet of paper, which seems to have been used by Special Executive Magistrate in routine course for deciding the said chapter cases. No doubt it is mentioned that on 21/12/1994 the petitioners were before the said Special Executive Magistrate and he did peruse the report of the complainant against them. The said order also mentions that notice was issued to the petitioners in view of the provisions of Section 111 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Code for convenience). What is most important to be seen its that the learned Magistrate in his order has not menti...
Madhavrao Gajanan Deshpande Vs. the State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)115; 2003(4)MhLj101
J.G. Chitre, J. 1. This petition has been mentioned in the board, as fixed for final hearing. It pertains to year 1997. Hence, this petition is being decided on merit in the absence of petitioner. The Criminal Case, which has been challenged is on police report. Shri Shringarpure, Additional Public Prosecutor for State of Maharashtra, is heard. Hence, it is also not necessary to wait for the presence of respondent No. 2, who has been served with the notice of hearing of this petition. 2. The petitioner has assailed the prosecution, which he is facing in the Court of J.M.F.C. (Railway) V.T. for offences punishable under Sections 451, 504 and 506(I) of Indian Penal Code. The said prosecution is based on a complaint, which was filed with the police by respondent No. 2 alleging that on 3/2/1995 at 2 P.M. the petitioner entered in his office and abused him in filthy language, threatened him and asked him to transmit the fax message to given address. When respondent No. 2 refused to do so, i...
Kailaash Vasantrao Ghule and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR310; 2003(3)BomCR105
C.K. Thakker, C.J.1. This petition is filed for quashing and setting aside public notice, Exhibit 'D' issued by the Collector, Nasik on 7th September, 2002 for proposing to hold general elections of Trimbak Municipal Council in the month of December, 2002.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioner No. 1 has been duly elected as the President of Trimbak Municipal Council and he is entitled to hold the said office for a period of two years from the date of election. As he would be completing two years in April, 2003, the relief deserves to be granted in his favour to the extent that he would continue to hold the office of President till that date. 3. For the above submission, reliance was placed on section 52 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965, as amended by the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships (Amendment and Continuance) Act, 1999 (Act 3 of 2000). Section 52 pro...
Manisha Koirala-ii Vs. Shashilal Nair and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)BomCR647
R.M. Lodha, J.1. We heard Mr. Satish Maneshinde, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Iqbal Chagla, learned Senior Counsel for respondent No. 1.2. The appellant is the original plaintiff in Suit No. 2750 of 2002 and respondent Nos. 1 to 3 herein are defendant Nos. 1 to 3 respectively. In the suit, the plaintiff has prayed for following reliefs:'(a) for a decree against defendant No. 1 for an amount of Rs. 50 lakhs towards her professional fees for her performance in the suit film 'Ek Chhotisi Love Story' produced and directed by defendant No. 1.(b) for an order of permanent injunction restraining the defendants jointly and severally from using the suit film 'Ek Chhotisi Love Story' for theatrical, non theatrical, commercial and non-commercial exhibition or from any other manner exhibiting or causing to be exhibited the said film containing the objectionable shots portraying the plaintiff and/or parting of possession of the release prints, rush prints or any other complete or incom...
High Court of Judicature of Bombay Vs. Ms. Manisha Koirala and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-2002
Reported in: 2003BomCR(Cri)1687; 2003CriLJ1634
R.M. Lodha, J.1. This Contempt Petition was registered Suo Motu as per our order dated 13th September 2002.2. We, heard Mr. Goolam Vahanvati learned Advocate General as Amicus Curiae, Mr. V. A. Thorat, learned senior counsel for contemnor -- Ms. Manisha Koirala and Mr. Janak Dwarkadas, learned senior counsel for contemnor -- Shri Shashilal Nair.3. The background in which the suo motu contempt petition was registered may be immediately noticed. The 1st contemnor -- Ms. Manisha Koirala is original plaintiff in the suit filed by her before this Court against the 2nd contemnor -- Shri Shashilal Nair who is original 1 st defendant in the said suit. The plaintiff prayed for diverse reliefs in the suit, inter alia permanent injunction for restraining the defendants in releasing or using the film 'Ek Chhotisi Love Story' with four disputed scenes. According to the plaintiff screening of the film 'Ek Chhotisi Love Story' with disputed scenes shall injure her reputation. In the suit she took out...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »