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.
Shri Mahalaxmi Sahakari Doodh Vyavasayik Maryadit and ors. Vs. Kolhapu ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-24-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR401; 2003(2)BomCR494
H.L. Gokhale, J.1. Writ Petition No. 1773 of 2001 is filed in the names of 103 co-operative societies dealing in milk. The dispute in this petition is with respect to their right to vote and participate in the election to the respondent No. 1 which is the Federal District Co-operative Society dealing in milk for the district of Kolhapur. The respondent No. 1 is a Specified Co-operative Society within the definition of that concept under section 144-A(2)(c) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'). The petitioners claim to be the primary co-operative societies registered under that Act and claim to be members of the respondent No. 1. The respondent No. 2 is the Collector of Kolhapur and as per the provisions of the said Act he has to conduct the elections to the Board of Directors of the 1st respondent Society. The respondent No. 3 is one Mr. Hasan Mushrif, Minister of State for Dairy Development, State of Maharashtra, against whom ...
Shilpa Shashikant Bugde Vs. Shashikant Vishnupant Bugde
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-24-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR1156; 2003(4)BomCR764
V.C. Daga, J.1. Heard rival contentions. Perused record and proceedings.2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the Family Court, Pune in Petition A No. 656 of 1999 dated 28-10-2001, dissolving marriage under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The appellant herein (husband) had filed the petition for divorce against the respondent (wife) on the allegation that she practised cruelty and deserted him and that the marriage has irretrievably broken down for a period of 21 years.3. On being noticed, the respondent appeared and filed her written statement alleging therein that the appellant (husband) has developed illicit relationship with one Mrs. Arole and also prayed for decree of divorce on the ground of adultery by setting up counter claim.4. The Family Court after examining pleadings of the parties framed issues relevant to the pleadings and put the petition for trial. The husband entered into the witness box, whereas the respondent-wife prayed for...
Surya Laminates Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: (2003)(152)ELT313Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellants purchased on high sea sale basis CRCO Silicon Steel Coils declaring them as "Rolled/ Defective Grade". The unit price declared was US $920 PMT C & F. On examination of the goods, they appeared to be of prime grade. The importers contested this observation. They relied upon the certificates of the manufacturer describing the goods as of 30PG 218 specification which was attributable to defective goods. The goods were then examined by the customs expert appraisers on various considerations they found the goods to be of prime grade. It was therefore proposed to raise the value to US $1150 PMT CIF resulting in differential duty amounting to Rs. 3,35,151/-. Mis-declaration was also alleged. The importers waived issue of a written show causes notice. In personal hearing they continued to insist that the goods were of defective grade. The Commissioner examined the invoice and the faxes given by the suppliers.Finding certain contradictions therein, he refused to place rel...
Karimkha Ajijkha Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: 2003BomCR(Cri)1384; 2003(1)MhLj502
R.K. Batta, J.1. The appellant was tried for possession of one gram of brown sugar under Section 20(b)(ii) of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred as the said Act). The appellant pleaded not guilty. The prosecution had examined seven witnesses in support of the charge. The trial Court vide judgment dated 25th October 1999 held the appellant guilty for the said charge and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for ten years and fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-, in default, R.I. for two years. The appellant was in detention in connection with crime from 23-2-1999 till the date of Judgment which was set off in terms of Section 428 of Criminal Procedure Code. The appellant continues to be in jail after his conviction till to date. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 27-11-1998, the appellant had returned back from the court hearing and at night time, one Sanjay Ruikar, Sepoy informed the Jail Superintendent Swati Sathe (PW-1) that the activities of the appellant who was in Barrack No. 6, we...
Mohd. Hafiz S/O Habibulla Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)53; 2003BomCR(Cri)1373; 2003(1)MhLj894
R.K. Batta, J.1. The appellant was tried for possession of 8 gms. 300 mg. of brown sugar under Section 21 of the N.D.P.S. Act. The prosecution had examined seven witnesses in support of the charge. The Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Court vide judgment dated 1-7-1999 held the appellant guilty for the said charge under Section 21 of the said Act. The appellant was sentenced to R. I. for ten years and fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-, in default, R. I for one and half years. The period of detention during the trial was set off. The appellant challenges the said order in appeal.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on prior information, which was reduced in writing and sent to the higher authorities, the appellant was accosted in front of Mayur Beer Bar. The appellant was searched and from his personal search, the contraband in question was found. Samples of contraband were sent to the Chemical Analyser, who found that the sample contained heroine (diacetyl-morphine) and falls under Section 2(xvi)(e)...
Suryoday Allo-metal Powders Ltd. Vs. Senior Intelligence Officer and a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALLMR662; 2003(4)BomCR284; 2003(2)MhLj171
V.C. Daga, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 12-12-2001, passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, passed below exhibit 5 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 1627 of 2001 refusing to grant injunction against the defendant restraining them from proceeding with any investigation or recovery proceeding arise out of the provision of Central Excise Act. THE FACTS :2. The facts leading to the present appeal are as under :--The appellants, the original plaintiffs, the limited company, originally known as M/s Tirupati Allo-Metal Powders Ltd., now known as 'M/s Suryoday Allo-Metal Powders Ltd.,' filed a suit for declaration and perpetual injunction being Regular Civil Suit No. 1627 of 2001, seeking declaration that the act of the subordinate intelligence Officer. Working under the Directorate General of Excise (Intelligence), Pune, who had taken search of the premises of M/s Suryoday Allo-Metal Powders Ltd., and investigation initiated pursuant thereto be declared null and vo...
Wallace Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M.V. Bunga Bidara and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Bom141; 2003(4)BomCR438
ORDER1. In these proceedings, the Third Defendant has moved this Court in a Notice of Motion which is being disposed of by this Court by this order. The Third Defendant prays for a direction that the suit be dismissed as against it for want of jurisdiction.2. The Plaintiff has instituted a suit for the recovery of an amount of U.S. Dollars 154,000 together with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the institution of the suit until payment/realization. The amount which is claimed in the suit represents the CIF value of 40 Drums, 1000 BOU Lincomycin HCL BP (Oral Grade) weighing about 1184 Kg. alleged to have been short-landed. The case of the Plaintiff is that in February 2001, the Plaintiff imported from Shanghai to Mumbai the aforesaid consignment under an invoice dated. 16th February, 2001 of the shippers. M/s Sino Pharmaceuticals (HK) Ltd. The consignment was entrusted by the aforesaid shippers to the Third Defendant at Shanghai. The Third Defendant issued a Bill of Lading dated...
Suresh Malappa Shetty Vs. Special Recovery Officer and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALLMR254; 2003(4)BomCR745; 2003(3)MhLj248
V.C. Daga, J. 1. Heard finally by consent of parties at the stage of admission. Perused record and documents. Introduction : 2. The source of this appeal is the order dated 27th November 2001 passed by the Bombay City Civil Court at Mumbai dismissing the notice of motion moved by the appellant/original plaintiff seeking to restrain the respondents/original defendants by an order of injunction from interfering with the alleged lawful possession of the plaintiff over the suit flat i.e. flat No. 401, located on the fourth floor of building No. 5, Neelan Nagar, Mulund (E), Mumbai 400 081 (hereinafter referred to as the 'suit flat'). FACTS : 3. The facts leading to the present appeal, in nut shell, are as under : The parties are referred to in their original capacity as they were before the City Civil Court. The defendant No. 3 is the owner of the suit flat. He had mortgaged this flat with defendant No. 2 i.e. Bharat Co-op. Bank (Mumbai) Ltd. ('the Bank' for short) by executing necessary lo...
Amartaara Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: [2003]262ITR598(Bom)
S.H. Kapadia, J.1. This reference is made by the Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the behest of the assessee. It concerns the assessment year 1978-79, corresponding to the previous year ending August 31, 1977. Accordingly, the following question of law has been referred to the High Court under Section 256(1) :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that ad hoc compensation received by the assessee from the insurance company was taxable as income for the assessment year 1978-79 ?'Facts :2. The assessee, Amartaara Limited, is a public limited company. The assessee, along with two other companies, as associate companies, had taken out five (5) policies of insurance under which loss or damage by fire to their buildings, plant and machinery, stock-in-trade, etc., was covered. On August 15, 1976, there was a fire in the factory of the assessee and the building, machinery and stock-in-trade were destroyed. On ...
Smoke Affected Residents Forum Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bo ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)BomCR450
C.K. Thakker, C.J.1. This Notice of Motion is taken out by the Joint Secretary of Bombay Pune Taxi men Association, Interveners in the main matter (Writ Petition No. 1762 of 1999) for the following relief in terms of prayer Clause (a). Prayer Clause (a) reads as under:'(a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to clarify that the order dated 17th October, 2001 passed by this Hon'ble Court in the above petition to the effect it shall not apply taxi, plying point to point on the routes inter region even if the same is registered within Greater Mumbai and respondent No. 8 be directed that such taxi's should not be given any permit to ply within Greater Mumbai.'2. In support of the Notice of Motion, an affidavit is filed by Kamlapati R. Dube, Joint Secretary of the Association wherein it was stated that the members of the applicant-Association are plying taxis 'between Bombay to Pune'. It was stated that an order passed by the Division Bench of this Court on 17th of October, 2001 does not app...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »