Mumbai Court August 2002 Judgments
Subramanian V. Iyer Vs. Air India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)BomCR579; (2002)4BOMLR860; [2003(96)FLR624]; (2003)IILLJ678Bom; 2003(1)MhLj871
R.M. Lodha, J.1. Subramanian V. Iyer petitioner hereinchallenges by means of this writ petition theorder dated 2nd August, 1990 whereby he has beendismissed from service by Air India-therespondent and prays that the said order be setaside and Air India be directed to reinstate himand with all consequential benefits.2. The controversy arises in thecircumstances which we briefly narratehereunder:-The petitioner initially joined Air Indiaas Stenographer in operation department in theyear 1969. He was promoted as operationassistant in the year 1972 and then as AssistantFlight Purser (Staff No. 27104) in the month ofAugust, 1979. On 18th March, 1988 his residencewas searched by the Enforcement Officers underthe Foreign Exchange Regulations Act (FERA) andallegedly, foreign currency, one gold biscuit andsome incriminating documents were found. He wasarrested. While the petitioner was in custody,by order dated 22/23rd March, 1988, he wassuspended with effect from 21st March, 1988. TheEnforceme...
Tag this Judgment!Sadanand Ramesh Samsi Vs. Kirloskar Cummins Ltd. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)BomCR166; (2003)2BOMLR171; 2002(4)MhLj804
R.J. Kochar, J.1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the Judgment and Order dated 14th July, 1995 passed by the learned Member of the Industrial Court, Pune in Revision Application (ULP) No. 58 of 1995 which was filed by the respondent company against the Judgment and order passed by the learned 2nd Labour Court, Pune on 31-5-1995 in the Complaint (ULP) NO. 77 of 1995 filed by the petitioner under Section 28 read with Section 30 and Item 1 (a), (b), (d) and (0 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short MRTU and PULP Act). The petitioner complained that his services were terminated by a letter dated 20-3-1995 w.e.f. 22-3-1995 in violation of the provisions of law and that it amounted to an unfair labour practice as aforesaid. He prayed for reinstatement with full backwages and continuity of service.2. The respondent company appeared in the complaint and contested by filing its written statement denying all the...
Tag this Judgment!Herdillia Chemicals Employees Union and ors. Vs. Herdillia Chemicals L ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)BomCR546; [2003(97)FLR972]; 2002(4)MhLj851
R.J. Kochar, J. 1. The petitioner Union and its General and Joint Secretaries are aggrieved by the impugned Judgment and Order dated 30-9-1995 passed by the Presiding Officer of the 4th Labour Court, Thane whereby she declared the strike commenced by the petitioners from 14.30 hrs. on 10-7-1995 as illegal till 19-8-1995. The said declaration of the illegal strike was made in the open Court on the date of the Judgment. 2. The respondent company filed a Reference under Section 25(1) of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 seeking declaration that the employees of the company had commenced and continued an illegal strike from 10-7-1995 under Section 24(1)(a) and (c) of the Act. Though initially the petitioners did not admit that the employees had gone on strike, it is now an admitted fact that the strike commenced on and from 10-7-1995 as was alleged by the Company. During the pendency of the Reference the petitioners gave a notic...
Tag this Judgment!Madhukar Narayan Rao Since Deceased by His Heirs Malati Madhukar Rao a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR687; 2003(1)BomCR796; (2003)2BOMLR154; 2002(4)MhLj462
A.M. Khanwilkar, J. 1. This writ petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, takes exception to the order passed by the Assistant Judge, Nasik dated September 3, 1983 in Civil Appeal No. 320 of 1981. 2. The original petitioner was tenant in respect of house No. 185 situated at village Mamlatdar Lane, Malegaon. The respondents are the landlords. The respondents had filed suit for recovery of possession of the suit premises inter alia on the ground of bona fide requirement under Section 13(1)(g) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Bombay Rent Act). That suit was decreed in favour of the respondents. In execution of that decree the respondents obtained possession of the suit premises on 4-5-1974. According to the petitioners, the respondents did not occupy the suit premises within one month from obtaining possession thereof, therefore, they filed application under Section 17 of the Act for restoration of posses...
Tag this Judgment!Laffans India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Pancham Singh Rawat and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)BomCR462; [2003(96)FLR310]; 2002(4)MhLj470
R.J. Kochar, J. 1. The petitioner employer is aggrieved by the impugned award dated 11th August 1997 passed by the Labour Court in Reference IDA No. 988 of 1995 to adjudicate the industrial dispute raised by the respondent workman for reinstatement with continuity of service and full backwages with effect from 5th January 1994. 2. Both the parties appeared before the Labour Court after the order of reference was given by the State Government under Section 10(l)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Both the parties filed their pleadings and adducedtheir, oral and documentary evidence in support of their respective pleadings. By the impugned award, the Labour Court directed the petitioner employer to pay a sum of Rs. 1,25,000/- by way of compensation in lieu of relief of reinstatement. 3. Briefly stated the dispute between the parties was whether the respondent workman had tendered his resignation voluntarily or was forced to resign from employment by the petitioner company. It appea...
Tag this Judgment!Union Bank of India Employees Union Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)BomCR800; (2003)2BOMLR375; [2003(96)FLR806]; (2003)ILLJ171Bom; 2003(1)MhLj348
R.J. Kochar, J.1. The petitioner claims to be All India Employees Union of the employees employed by the respondent No. 2-Bank. The petitioner Union is aggrieved by the Order of the respondent No. 1 dated 24-5-1995 in exercise of its powers under Section 10(1)(c) read with Section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 refusing to refer the industrial dispute raised by the petitioner Union for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal.2. It appears that by a letter dated 3-8-1992 the petitioner Union submitted a demand and raised a dispute against the respondent Bank. The relevant portion of the letter reads as under:(a) the interest rate be brought down to 4%.(b) Any other steps which are just and equitable to be taken with the help of the machinery available at your office.It appears from the demand letter that the employees of the Bank were getting the facility of clean loan for several years at the rate of 4% p.a. The Management had unilaterally increased the rate of interest to ...
Tag this Judgment!Deccan Mechanical and Chemical Industries Ltd. Vs. Pratibha Waman Kulk ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)BomCR259
R.J. Kochar, J.1. The petitioner employer is aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Industrial Court, Pune on 5-9-1995 in Revision Application U.L.P. No. 78 of 1989 rejecting its revision application along with the revision application filed by the respondent employee against the judgment and order dated 12-10-1989 passed by the learned Labour Court, Pune in Complaint (U.L.P.) No. 19 of 1984 filed by the respondent employee against the petitioners under section 28 read with section 30 and Item 1(a), (b), (d), (f) and (g) of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short M.R.T.U. & P.U.L.P. Act). The respondent employee in the said complaint had prayed for a declaration that the order of termination passed by the petitioner amounted to an unfair labour practice and that she should be given the relief of reinstatement with full backwages and continuity of service. 2. It appears from the synopsis given by...
Tag this Judgment!Sivanandam Vivekanand Babu and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(4)BomCR700
B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. Both these petitions involve a common challenge viz. the decision of the respondent No. 2 University holding them ineligible for admission to the M.B.A. degree course in the academic year 1998-98 and, therefore, they are being decided by a common judgment.2. In the first petition, the petitioner belongs to Bestha BC-A group in the reserved category and he passed his B.B.M. (Bachelor of Business Management) degree course in the year 1997 by scoring 45.2% marks from the Nagarjuna University in A.P. He is a resident of Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner, in the second petition, also claims to belong to a reserved category and a resident of Gujarat State. She passed her B.A. degree from the South Surat University at Surat with 48% marks.3. Vide Circular No. 107 of 1998 the respondent No. 2 University had framed the Admission Rules to different courses conducted by it as well as its affiliated colleges. Clause 3 of the said circular stated that candidates from Maharashtra ...
Tag this Judgment!Manisha Koirala Vs. Shashilal Nair and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR426; 2003(2)BomCR136
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Four scenes of four minutes duration in a film, titled 'Ek Chhotisi Love Story' is the subject matter of the present action. Heard forthwith.2. Apart from the facts as pleaded considering the issues involved, the film as cleared by the Censor Board was viewed in the presence of Counsel for the parties and the parties. The story is about an adolescent boy aged about fifteen years who is obsessed with the girl 26. The boy has the habit of peeping into the house of the woman. The day-to-day events witnessed by the boy are portrayed in the film. The story revolves around this infatuation of this adolescent boy with the girl and what he witnesses as a peeping tom; The girl is friendly with a man with whom she shares an intimate relationship. This emerges from the film.The plaintiff is the central character in the film, except for a few scenes which are the subject matter of the present action and which were acted by a double. The cause of action as pleaded by the plaintif...
Tag this Judgment!J.R. Kulkarni and ors. Vs. Directorate of Health Services and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ1203
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J.1. All these writ petitions are being disposed of with common judgment and order because they revolve around the same and similar point. However, Criminal Writ Petition No. 1180 of 1990 is having its different identity in a particular sphere because it is revolving around four criminal cases bearing Nos. 310, 311, 312 and 313 of 1988. The evidence has been entirely recorded, arguments have been heard. The Judgments have not been delivered.2. All those petitions are revolving around the complaints lodged by complainant- Mahankalkar, Drugs Inspector, alleging that the saline bottles were substandard because there were particulates present.3. Shri Nitin Pradhan submitted that after the arguments have been heard for about six months, the judgment was not pronounced and on merit the petitioners are deserving to be acquitted. He urged that in the interest of justice this Court be pleased to decide the writ petitions on merit because that would avoid further delay in dispo...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »