Mumbai Court July 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.
Philip Fernandes Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Airport
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-16-2002
Reported in: (2002)(146)ELT180Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The brief facts of the case arc that on 15-3-1998 a passenger Shri Philip Fernandas while departing for Dubai by flight No. EK503, was intercepted by Air Intelligence Unit Officers in the departure lounge of CST Airport, Mumbai after his clearance through Customs. On enquiring in the presence of panchas as to whether he was carrying any foreign currency on his person or in his baggage he replied in negative. Search of his person did not yield anything incriminating; however, search of his handbag resulted in the recovery of 6,345/- UAE Dirhams and 107 US $, equivalent to Indian Rs. 69,162/-. Search of the checked in baggage (1 black coloured 'Echolac' - zipped shoulder bag) which was retrieved from the Airlines and identified by the passenger, led to the recovery of one polythene wrapped packet (sealed with adhesive tape) containing US $ 1,74,450/-, UAE Dirhams 1,04,000/-, Kuwait Dinars 3,765/-, Omani Riyals 660/-, Bahrain Dinars 830/- and Qatar Riyals 17,200/-.2. Shri Philip Ferna...
Rameshchandra S/O Shankarlal Saboo (Dr.) Vs. State of Maharashtra and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-16-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR118; 2003(1)BomCR126; 2002(4)MhLj892
R.G. Deshpande, J. 1. The petitioner has approached this court challenging the order passed by Shri Sunil Tatkare - the then State Minister for Urban Development Department, Government of Maharashtra, whereby the present petitioner Shri Saboo is removed from the post of President, Municipal Council, Risod and further that, he has been held disqualified for contestingelection for six years on any post as a Member of the Municipal Council. This order dated 7-9-2001 is communicated to the petitioner by the Desk Officer by letter dated 12-9-2001. 2. The petitioner was issued a show cause notice in accordance with the provisions of Section 55-A of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of the purpose of brevity). As per the show-cause notice in all six charges were levelled against the petitioner. These six charges are as under : 1] Non holding of the meetings as per the Rules. 2] Unauthorisedly disposal o...
Kishor S. Kasare Vs. S. Kumars Group of Companies and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-16-2002
Reported in: [2003(96)FLR928]; 2002(4)MhLj482
R.J. Kochar, J. 1. Before I deal with the issue of backwages it is relevant to note the facts which have given rise to this petition. According to the petitioner, he was employed in December, 1985 as a Peon with M/s S. Kumar Research and Development (P) Ltd. On and from 1-5-1988 he was transferred with continuity of service to M/s S. Kumars Textiles Ltd. On 1-6-1989 he was again transferred with continuity of service to M/s S. Kumars Ltd. It is the case of the petitioner that on 13-3-1989 the said M/s S. Kumars Ltd. terminated his employment orally. The petitioner was aggrieved by the Order of oral termination, and therefore, he filed a complaint of unfair labour practice under Section 28 read with Section 30 and Item 1 of Schedule IV of the MRTU and PULP Act, 1971. The said complaint was initially dismissed by the Labour Court on the ground that it was barred under Section 59 of the MRTU and PULP Act. The petitioner filed a Revision Application before the Industrial Court against the ...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Janabai W/O Yeshwant Kurhat and or ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-16-2002
Reported in: 2003ACJ350; 2002(4)MhLj544
B.B. Vagyani, J.1. Heard.2. Admit. Taken up for final hearing forthwith.3. This first appeal is directed against the award passed by the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Aurangabad in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 129 of 1998. The accident took place on 28-2-1998 at 2.03 p.m. on Chalisgaon-Kannad road near Ambadi Canal. Deceased Raju was driving the scooter bearing No. HVG-4556. The scooter belonged to respondent No. 3 i.e. original respondent in the claim petition, who happens to be father of deceased Raju. A truck was ahead of Raju. While negotiating the V turn, the truck applied brakes. Deceased Raju, while negotiating the same V turn also applied brakes of scooter. He could not control his scooter and ultimately felled from scooter and died. Therefore, the mother of deceased Raju filed claim petition against owner of the scooter i.e. father of deceased Raju and the Insurance Company with whom the scooter was insured under the insurance policy.4. The Tribunal treated the...
Bakubhai Keshavlal Shah Since Deceased Through His Heirs and L.Rs. Vs. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-16-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR558; 2003(1)BomCR602
A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the order passed by the Maharashtra State Co-operative Appellate Court, Pune Bench, Bombay dated 17th March, 1989 in Appeal No. 83 of 1986. 2. The premises in question is a residential flat bearing No. R-359 in Adinath Co-operative Housing Society, Pune Satara Road, Pune admeasuring about 800 sq.ft. It is not in dispute that the respondent No. 2 is registered as a tenant Co-partnership Housing Society. The respondent No. 1 is a member of the respondent No. 2 society and allottee of the suit flat that pursuant to the permission granted by the respondent No. 2 society vide resolution dated 24-6-1974, in favour of respondent No. 1 the original petitioner was inducted in the suit premises by the respondent No. 1. According to the respondents the petitioner was inducted only on leave and licence basis as permissible under the bye-laws of the society. Undisputedly the petitioner was put...
Pandi Bandu Wani Since Deceased Through His L.Rs. and ors. Vs. Sapadu ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-16-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)ALLMR1007; 2003(1)BomCR607
A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the judgment and decree passed by the Additional District Judge, Nasik dated 8-2-1988 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 101 of 1984.2. The premises in question are CTS No. 1730 at Satara, District Nasik. The said property was originally owned by one Gopikabai wife of Vishnu Wani. Out of the said property, the entire western and middle portion was let out to the predecessor of the petitioners herein namely, Bandu Ramji Wani, by the said Gopikabai at monthly rent of Rs. 8/- for the purpose of residence and business of storage of grocery goods. This fact is not in dispute as the parties have contested the matter on that basis and it has been so stated in paragraph 1 of the writ petition before this Court.3. The respondents on the other hand claim to have become owners in respect of the suit premises by virtue of the Will executed by deceased Gopikabai on 30-7-1971 bequeathing the suit prop...
Ramkrishna Mangesh Keni Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-16-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALLMR54; (2002)104BOMLR814
R.J. Kochar, J.1. The petitioner is primarily aggrieved by the order of the Additional Municipal Commissioner (E. S.) of the Bombay Municipal Corporation passed by him on 13th June, 2002 holding the petitioner to be disqualified for being a Municipal Councillor under Section 16(1C)(a) of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 and declaring him deemed to have vacated the office on and from 30th May, 2002 on the basis of the decision of the Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims, Konkan Division, Thane holding him not belonging to the reserved category of Mahadev Koli. The petitioner is therefore, principally prejudiced, hurt and injured by the decision of the said Committee dated 30th May, 2002 holding his caste claim of Mahadev Koli as invalid and cancelling his Caste Certificate issued to him by the Executive Magistrate, Bombay City vide No. MAG/CC/ST/1 / 1990 dated 31st January, 1990. The petitioner has given challenge to the legality and validity of both the afo...
K.L. Juryani Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-15-2002
Reported in: (2003)(3)SLJ270CAT
1. This is an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 for issue a mandatory order directing the respondents to consider the case of the applicant for promotion to the post of Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Group-'A' in the light of the direction/guidelines issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension vide Memorandum dated 14,9.1992 by holding a review Departmental Promotion Committee held two years after January 1990 and based on the said review to order the promotion of the applicant as Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Group-'A' retrospectively from 1992 on which the applicant became eligible for promotion as per guidelines contained in the said Memorandum dated 14.9.1992.2. On perusal of para 1 of the O.A., we find that applicant has challenged Office Order No. 16/90, 225/92, 21/93, 185/94, 225/94 and 34/96 dated 17.1.1990, 3.9.1992, 28.1.1993, 20.9.1994, 19.10.1995 and 20.2.1996 respectively by which Ap...
M.A. Vidyasagaran Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-15-2002
Reported in: (2003)(2)SLJ171CAT
1. This is an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 to quash and set aside the Memorandum dated 10.01.1996 (Exhibit 'B') with the direction to the Respondents to treat the Applicant as belonging to the Examiner's cadre and he be extended all benefits on that basis including promotion to the cadre of Appraiser and if need be, to cancel and withdraw the unilateral order passed by them regularising the services of the Applicant as Preventive Officer, promote the Applicant as Appraiser from the date any of his junior has been promoted to the said cadre under Estt. Office Order No.85/95 dated 03.04.1995 with seniority, fixation of pay and arrears on that basis. In alternative, the Applicant has sought the seniority in the cadre of Preventive Officer w.e.f. 08.03.1983 and grant him promotion to the post of Superintendent of Customs on that basis with all consequential benefits.2. The Applicant was appointed as a Stenographer in the Customs Department. He was...
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) Vs. Sterlite Industr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-15-2002
Reported in: [2003]113CompCas273(Bom); [2003]45SCL475(Bom)
1. These appeals arise out of an order passed in Company Petition No. 202 of 2002 sanctioning a scheme of arrangement between the Respondent Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd( for short 'company') and its shareholders under Section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956. The scheme was presented to the Company Judge on 18th February 2002 after meetings of the equity share holders, secured creditors and unsecured creditors of the company had approved of the scheme at their separate meetings called for the purpose pursuant to order dated 9th January 2002 on Summons for Directions issued by the company. The scheme was sanctioned by the Company Judge after notice 394A of the Companies Act. The drawn up order of the learned Judge shows that the Central Government through the Regional Director, Department of Company Affairs, Maharashtra submitted to the order of the Court. It is recorded in the minutes of the impugned order that the Central Government had no objection to the Scheme.2. Appeal Lodging N...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »