Mumbai Court December 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.
Ahmednagar Municipal Council, Through Its Chief Officer Vs. Suresh Sha ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)95
N.V. Dabholkar, J.1. Heard Advocates Shri S.B. Deshmukh and ShriL.B. Pallod for respective parties.2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith bymutual consent.The short point that was argued and is beingconsidered in this writ petition is :'Whether Chief Judicial Magistrate,Ahmednagar was competent to entertain anapplication by party before it and make areference to High Court under section 15(2)of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, forappropriate action. '3. The factual background, which gives rise topresent controversy, can be stated, in brief, as follows:-Petitioner-Municipal Council carried outrevision of house taxes in the year 1985-86 and fixedannual rental value of the house property owned byrespondent at Rs.4,698/-. Revision petitioner preferredtax appeal under section 169 of the MaharashtraMunicipalities Act against the said revision of annualrental value. It was Tax Appeal No.55 of 1987. The samewas dismissed by Chief Judicial Magistrate on 17.1.1988.Respondent preferred Criminal...
Shamrao Vithal Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Star Glass Works
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALLMR583; 2003(3)BomCR347; [2003]114CompCas378(Bom); [2003]42SCL769(Bom)
R.M. Lodha, J. 1. The important yet interesting question pertaining to legislation by incorporation has been raised in this writ petition. The question is whether in Section 2(e) of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions, Act, 1993 (for snort, 'Act of 1993') which says that 'Banking Company' shall have the meaning assigned to it in Clause (c) of Section 5 of Banking Regulation Act, 1949, the Co-operative Bank is included by virtue of Section 56(a)(i) of Banking Regulation Act which provides that unless context otherwise requires, reference to 'Banking Company' shall be construed as reference to 'Co-operative Bank'.2. The aforesaid question arises in the facts and circumstances which we very briefly narrate hereinafter. The Shamrao Vithal Co-operative Bank Ltd. a Scheduled Multi State Co-operative Bank is the 1st petitioner in the writ petition. M/s Star Glass Works respondent No. 1 is a partnership firm registered under the Partnership Act, 1932 carrying on the b...
Children's Aid Society Employees Union and Anr. Vs. Children's Aid Soc ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR936; 2003(3)BomCR387; (2003)IILLJ683Bom; 2003(2)MhLj95
C.K. Thakker, C.J.1. Both the petitions have been filed by the petitioners for an appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents toextend pension, gratuity and other retiral benefits to the employees of Children's Aid Society, as have been made available to other employees of the aided special schools for disabled, as per Government Resolution dated February 1, 1984.2. A prayer is made in the cognate petition to pay dues of Smt. Sulochana S. Salvi, petitioner of that petition.3. In the first petition (W. P. 2774 of .1999), the case of the petitioners is that petitioner No. 1 is a registered trade union having registration No. BY/ II/8839. The union was registered in 1956 and is the only union existing at the Children's Aid Society. It was stated that the Children's Aid Society was formed by the Government with the Home Minister as its ex-office Chairman. The Governing Council consists of six members nominated by the State Government. In addition, there are six elected m...
Thirumalai Kumaran Vs. Union Territory of Dadra and Nagar Haveli and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2002
Reported in: 2003BomCR(Cri)1515; 2003CriLJ2853; 2003(2)MhLj53
D.G. Deshpande, J.1. This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the prayer therein is that this Hon'ble Court to issue a writ of habeas corpus against the respondents and direct them to produce the petitioner's wife Manisha before this Court.2. When the petition came before us on 27-8-2002 Mr. Agarwal, appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2, raised preliminary objection about maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner had availed of the facility under Section 97 of the Criminal Procedure Code. His so called wife was produced before the Magistrate. She was questioned by the Magistrate and on being satisfied that the girl wants to leave with father, she was allowed to go. Therefore, according to Mr. Agarwal, this petition was not maintainable because alternate remedy was resorted to and exhausted by the petitioner. However on that day Mr. Shirodkar produced the album of photographs wherein the girl Manisha was shown with the petit...
Rajesh Ashokrao Patil and ors. Vs. Dhananjaya Samaj Seva Sanstha and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR955; 2003(2)MhLj124
C.K. Thakker, C.J. 1. Civil Application No. 1972 of 2002 is filed by 50 students doing a course in Diploma in Education (D.Ed.) from Dhananjaya Samaj Seva Sanstha, respondent No. 1, a College registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, as well as Societies Registration Act, 1860. 2. The case of the petitioners is that the first respondent college has filed Writ Petition No. 4211 of 2001 in this Court for certain reliefs prayed in the prayer clause of the petition. On 10th September, 2001, notice was issued by the Division Bench of this Court and the respondents were directed to file affidavit in reply within four weeks. It was also observed that, if possible, on the next date of hearing the matter would be disposed of finally. The counsel for the State was also asked to seek instructions as to whether the college which was being run bythe petitioner (respondent No. 1 in C. A. No. 1972 of 2002) without permission had since been closed down and whether the Government would consi...
Johnson and Johnson Ltd. Vs. Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Ex ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALLMR838; 2003(4)BomCR351; (2003)2CompLJ380(Bom); 2003(154)ELT370(Bom); 2003(2)MhLj165
Vijay Daga, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the rival parties. This petition is directed against the order dated 11-11-1987 passed by the Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, New Delhi, in exercise of powers conferred under Clause 8 of the Import (Control) Order, 1955, whereunder; the entitlement of the petitioners i.e. the quota to import raw material for manufacturing Sanitary Napkins was reduced by 20%. In other words, petitioners were permitted to make imports under OGL Licence and receiving import licences and customs clearance permits and allotment of imported material from State Trading Corporation (STC) and Minerals Metals Trading Corporation (MMTC) or any other similar agency for the period from 10th November, 1987 to 31st March, 1990 to the extent of 80% of their entitlement. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners to import raw material was curtailed by 20% for the period 10-11-1987 to 31-3-1990.2. The facts brought on record reveal that the show cause notice date...
Mithailal Jagram Gupta Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)35; 2002BomCR(Cri)1509; I(2003)DMC535; 2003(2)MhLj78
V.K. Tahilramani, J.1. The appellant has preferred this appeal through jail against the judgment and order dated 17-5-2002 passed by the IIIrd Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Thane. The said judgment and order is passed in Sessions Case No. 397/99. By the said judgment and order, the appellant came to be convicted under Section 498A, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs. 3000/- i.d. S.I. for one year. He was also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 306 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs. 5000/- i.d. S. I. for one year. Both the sentences to run concurrently.2. It is the prosecution case that the appellant was married to Pushpa (deceased) on 26-10-1998. After the marriage, the appellant started suspecting the character of his wife and hence, he started ill-treating her and harassing her. This fact was disclosed by Pushpa to the complainant who is her brother i.e. Kamlakant Gupta (PW 1) as well a...
ishwarbhai Ranchoddas Parmar Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)91; 2003CriLJ4715
J.G. Chitre, J. 1. The appellant is hereby assailing correctness, propriety and legality of the judgment and order passed by 3rd Additional Sessions Judge. Thane is Sessions case No. 769 of 1993, by which he convicted the appellant for offence punishable under provisions of Section 376(2)(f) of Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment of period of two months. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that prosecutrix P.W.1, Manisha was aged 5 years at the time of incident and had come to the hut of her grandmother Kamal Yadav, who was residing in hutment opposite United Carbon Company at Thane, Belapur Road, Thane. On 1/5/1993 at about 11.30 a.m. when prosecutrix Manisha was playing opposite the hut of her grand-mother P.W.2 Kamal Yadav, the appellant called her to his hut, closed the door of the hut and made the prosecutrix to lie on a mattress. Thereafter, he remove...
Suresh Ruprao Khandar and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2002
Reported in: 2003BomCR(Cri)1176; 2003CriLJ2219; 2003(3)MhLj208
S.T. Kharche, J.1. Heard Shri Mardikar, Advocate for the applicants and Shri Thakare, A.P.P. for the respondent. 2. This application has been filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure by the applicants accused persons for quashing the criminal prosecution and for setting aside the order dated 23rd June, 1998 passed below Exh. 110 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amravati in Regular Criminal Case No. 44 of 1994. 3. Mr. Mardikar, the learned counsel for the applicants contended that Crime No. 295 of 1991 for the offences punishable under Sections 468, 420, 161, 165, 471, 474, 120B read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code has been registered on the basis of which chargesheet has been filed against the applicants-accused. Both the applicants-accused are in the service of Police Department as Junior Clerks. The incident is said to have taken place on 22nd of August 1991 and the report was lodged on 23rd August 1991 by one complainant Anand Mundkur. He contended that th...
Jhaverilal Popat Dedhia Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2002
Reported in: 2003BomCR(Cri)891; 2003(3)MhLj221
J.G. Chitre, J.1. Shri Keshwani submitted that the learned trial Judge has held that items mentioned in the annexure Exh. 'C' are not belonging to the accused (excluding the absconding accused No. 5) and therefore, the learned trial Judge should have handed over those articles to the complainant, either on bond or without bond, because, those items are mentioned in F.I.R. Shri Keshwani further submitted that it is not possible for a jeweller or a shop keeper to maintain the register, which would be showing the items exhibited in his shop clearly. He submitted that there may be some jewellers or shopkeepers who may not be so clever to maintain the register in proper way, so as to convince the Court that they are entitled to get those articles returned after a Criminal case is decided. He submitted that there was no reason for the trial Court to direct that those articles be confiscated to State Government. 2. Shri Keshwani further submitted that those articles have been identified by th...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »