Mumbai Court March 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.
Hasmukhlal Jayantilal Doshi Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-01-2002
Reported in: 2002(143)ELT526(Bom)
V.C. Daga, J.1. These writ petitions are directed against the order passed by the Collector of Customs, Bombay, challenging confiscation of goods in exercise of powers under Section 122 read with Section 111(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 (Act for short), giving an option to the petitioners/importers under Section 125 of the Act to pay fine and penalty in lieu of confiscation.2. Petitions are different but the issue involved is identical based on common facts. So a single judgment will dispose of both these petitions.Facts in brief:3. The facts necessary to appreciate the rival contentions have been drawn from Writ Petition No. 3332 of 1988. These are as under :-The petitioner imported the Sodium Saccharine vide Invoice No. CAD-XB-0179C-01 from Lucky Goldstar International Corporation, Korea under Bill of Entry bearing No. 011993, Rotation No. 2783 for home consumption.The petitioner claimed clearance under import licence against export product--bicycle components and accessory materials....
Gurudayalsingh S/O Mehersingh Bindra Vs. Basantsingh S/O Mehersingh Bi ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-01-2002
Reported in: (2002)2BOMLR340; 2003(1)MhLj740
N.V. Dabholkar, J.1. By this revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, petitioner/respondent in Regular Civil Appeal No. 42/2000 pending on the file of District Court, Aurangabad, takes an exception to the order dated 2-9-2000 passed by Extra Joint District Judge, Aurangabad, in the said matter.2. On 25-11-1971, respondent filed Special Civil Suit No. 50/1971 for partition and separate possession against present petitioner. The suit was decided by judgment and order dated 24-12-1999. The trial Court held that most of the claim of the respondent was false, vexatious and also awarded compensatory costs. However, claim was decreed to some minor extent.3. It appears that respondent presented appeal against the said judgment and decree, which is subsequently registered as Regular Civil Appeal No. 42/2000 to the registry of District Court on 31-1-2000. At that time, the appeal memo was tendered without being accompanied by certified copy of decree under challenge. On 25-2-20...
Bhagwan S/O Ganuji Gadekar Vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corpor ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-01-2002
Reported in: (2002)IIILLJ470Bom
V.M. Kanade, J.1. By this Petition, the Petitioner is seeking appropriate writ directing the Respondents to reinstate him in service with full back wages and continuity of service and for further direction of quashing enquiry report passed by the Enquiry Officer and the consequent order of dismissal dated January 23, 1984.2. The brief facts, giving rise to the present petition, are as follows:The petitioner was appointed as an Officer trainee for a period of 9 months vide order dated May 10, 1977. Upon completion of training by the petitioner in the Central Training Institute, Bhusari, he was appointed as Class II (Jr.) Officer in the Scale of Rs. 350-650/- and was posted as Additional Depot Manager of the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Pune Region. The petitioner was confirmed as Technical Class II (Junior) Officer with effect from March 1, 1979.3. The petitioner was transferred from Pune Region to Nagpur Region on December 23, 1978 and was subsequently transferred to A...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›