Mumbai Court August 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.
i.C.i.C.i. Bank Limited Vs. Daewoo Motors (India) Ltd. and
Court: DRAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: IV(2004)BC220
1. This Misc. Appeal is filed by the appellants ICICI Bank Limited being aggrieved by the order dated 23.7.2002 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of Debts Recovery Tribunal III, Mumbai on Exhibit 17 in the Original Application No. 162 of 2002. By the impugned order, the learned Presiding officer rejected the application made by the applicant Bank wherein two fold prayers were made. The first prayer was for giving direction to the receiver who has been already appointed by the DRT to sell property mentioned in Exhibits A, B and C to the original application by public auction, by private treaty or otherwise and the second prayer in the alternative, was that the order dated 9.5.2002 passed by the DRT-III, Mumbai, directing payment of royalty of Rs. 10 lacs after every quarter be modified and royalty amount be enhanced to Rs. 15 crores per month. The learned Presiding Officer, however, by the impugned order, rejected both the prayers. The original application came to be filed by the...
Ulka Advertising (P.) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: (2005)94ITD282(Mum.)
1. to 6. These paras are not reproduce here, as they involved minor issues. 2a. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in not accepting the contention of the appellant that assets which have been fully depreciated before 1-4-1988 did not enter the block of assets as introduced with effect from assessment year 1988-89. 2b. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the provisions of Section 50(1) of the IT Act were applicable on sale of assets which did not form part of the opening written down value of the block of assets at the beginning of the year as they had been fully depreciated in an earlier year. 2c. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ld. CIT(A) erred making an addition of Rs. 14,00,000 as deemed short term capital gain under Section 50 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2d. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ld. CIT(A) erred in not allowing the loss of Rs. 7...
State Bank of India and Subsidiary Banks Employees Union Vs. General M ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALLMR1061; 2003(4)BomCR718; (2003)1BOMLR144; (2003)ILLJ1052Bom; 2003(1)MhLj28
Marlapalle, J.1. The Petitioner No. 1 is a union andPetitioner No. 2 is an employee of the Respondent No.1 Bank [State Bank of India] and at the relevant timewas working under the Respondent No.3. The grievanceraised in this petition pertains to the appointment ofTrainee Officers by way of promotion. On 2nd March,1991 the Bank issued circular No. PER/KCL/of 1991inviting applications for preparation of the list ofeligible employees for appointment as Trainee Officerswith effect from 1st August, 1991. The requirements,like minimum service, minimum age, educationalqualifications etc., were set out in the saidcircular. The Petitioner No. 2 responded and he wentthrough the process of selection. He appeared for thewritten test held on 12th May, 1991 and he wasdeclared successful in the same. He was called forviva-voce on 15th July, 1991 and he attended the samebefore the interview committee. However, when thenames of successful candidates were announced he didnot find his name in the list fo...
Nutan Vidyalaya Shikshan Sanstha and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)BomCR784; (2003)1BOMLR147; [2003(96)FLR593]; 2002(4)MhLj579
D.G. Karnik, J.1. The petitioner No. 1 society runs a school known as Nutan Vidyalaya at Sailu District Parbhani and also runs another school known as L.L.R. Girls School which is a Girls Secondary. School. Petitioner No. 1 also runs Junior Colleges.2. On 1st of May, 1987 the petitioner society appointed one Shri V.H. Datar who was then the senior most Assistant Teacher to the post of Head Master and appointed Shri R.A. Giri, the petitioner No. 2 to the post of an Assistant Head Master. Both the appointments were approved by the Education Officer, Zilla Parishad who is the respondent No. 3 herein, by a communication dated 24th September, 1987.3. Shri V.H. Datar, the Head Master of Nutan Vidyalaya retired on 30th April, 1989, Shri R.A. Giri, the petitioner No. 2, who was then the Assistant Head Master informed the management in writing on 9th June, 1989 that on account of domestic difficulties he was unable to accept the post of a Head Master for a period of two years. Hence, the petiti...
Khamgaon Urban Co-operative Bank Limited and anr. Vs. Deepak S/O Waman ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR603; 2003(1)BomCR154; 2003(1)MhLj10
S.A. Bobde, J.1. This petition is directed against the order dated 15th June, 2001, passed by the Minister of State for Co-operation, under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The predecessors of Khamgaon Urban Co-operative Bank (hereinafter referred to as petitioner/bank) gave a loan to Ajintha Sahakari Ginning and Pressing Factory Ltd., Buldana/respondent No. 2-society. The respondent No. 2-society failed to repay the loan amount. Thereafter the predecessors of the petitioner-bank demanded repayment of the loan from the respondent No. 2-society. On 5-11-1987, the respondent No. 2-society requested the predecessors of the petitioner-bank for sympathetic consideration, i.e. grant of further time to repay the loan outstanding amount of Rs. 14,31,672=08. After about a year the petitioner-bank initiated proceedings for recovery of the loan amount under Section 101 of the Act before the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative ...
Manjiri Ranganath Kulkarni Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR27; 2003(3)BomCR158; (2003)2BOMLR118; 2003(1)MhLj93
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J. 1. In all these matters, common questions of law and facts arise and therefore they were heard together, and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Heard learned advocates for the parties. Rule. By consent, the rule is made returnable forthwith.3. In all these matters, the Respondent-Collector has rejected the applications under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, hereinafter called as 'the said Act'. Such rejection has been on three grounds. Firstly, that the applicants had not produced materials in support of the claim for enhancement of compensation along with the said applications. Secondly, that the stamp duty on some of the applications was paid after the period of limitations prescribed under Section 18 for filing of the application. Thirdly, that the reference of the matters to the Civil Courts will result in waste of the valuable time of the Civil Courts.4. Upon hearing the learned advocates and perusal of the record, it is seen that und...
SaifuddIn Saheblal Vazir Vs. Smt. Habjabai Mishra Patel and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Bom36; 2003(1)ALLMR131; 2003(3)BomCR242; 2003(2)MhLj610
ORDERR.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Perused the records. Rule, by Consent, rule made returnable forthwith. 2. The suit being Regular Civil Suit No. 440/1982 came to be tiled by the respondents for eviction of the petitioner from a plot of land admeasuring 27 x 54 sq. ft. out of property bearing C. T. S. No. 1333/27, 'E' ward, Tarna Nagar Co operative Society, Sagarmal, Kolhapur and was decreed by the trial Court and the appeal against the same was dismissed by the lower appellate Court. The matter was carried in Writ Petition No.1363/1995. The learned single Judge of this Court after taking stock of the facts of the case, disputed as well undisputed. Pinpointed the dispute being related to the document dated 31st March, 1976 which according to the respondents speaks of creation of lease for more than one year, and therefore, in the absence of registration thereof, is not admissible in evidence and cannot be read in evidence for any purpose wherea...
Prakash Nathyaba Bhosale Vs. Laxman Ganaba Bhosale
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Bom41; 2003(1)ALLMR1016; 2003(1)BomCR218
ORDERR.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard the learned advocates for the parties and perused the record. Rule. By consent the rule is made returnable forthwith.2. Pursuant to the decree dated 21st September. 1979 RCS No. 76/74 declaring the share of the parties, the matter was referred to Tahsildar for partition of the properties. Thereupon partition suggested by the Tahsildar was objected to by the plaintiff Nos. 1 to 3 and the original defendant Nos. 1 and 3 in the said suit. The said objections were overruled by the Tahsildar by an order dated 25-3-1988, Aggrieved by the said order, the plaintiff Nos. 1 to 3 and the defendant Nos. 1 and 3 preferred an appeal to S.D.O., Phaltan Sub-Division, being Appeal No. 3 of 1988 which came to be allowed by an Order dated 28th June, 1990. The same was challenged by the defendant No. 2 by filing Second R.T.S. Appeal No. 2 of 1990 before the Additional Collector, Satara, who by order dated 30th April. 1993 dismissed the said Second Appeal. Thereupon, th...
Citizens of Deulgaon Raja Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALLMR212; 2003(4)BomCR223; 2003(1)MhLj766
V.M. Kanade, J.1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner claimed to be the citizen of village Deulgaon Raja, Taluqa Deulgaon Raja, District Buldana. The petitioner is claiming the following reliefs in the said petition.'1. It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to allow the petition with costs by quashing the Resolutions dated 28-2-1988 and 20-2-1988 passed by the respondent No. 2 and circular dated 25-1-1988 issued by the respondent No. 1.(1-A) That Section 11 of the Amending Act of XLV of 1975 may kindly be declared ultra vires to the Article 288 of the Constitution of India.2. During the pendency of this petition the effect and operation of Government Circular dated 25-1-1988 and the increase taxes as per Resolution dated 28-2-1988 and 20-2-1988 be stayed.3. Any other relief to which these petitioners are found entitled to be kindly granted to these petitioners.'2. The petitioner, in brief, is challe...
The Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay, a Statutory Corporation C ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: AIR2004Bom44; 2004(163)ELT22(Bom); 2003(4)MhLj689
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 Small Causes Court at Bombay dated 17th Feb., 1986 in Regular Suit No. 914/1182/1999. That suit was filed by the Petitioners against the Respondents to recover a sum of Rs. 7055.67ps. with interest thereon at the rate of 10 per cent per annum from the date of the suit till realization with rests and professional charges. The background in which the said suit came to be filed has been neatly articulated by the Trial Court in Para 2 of the impugned Judgment. The same reads thus:The facts are mostly admitted and they may be stated as under-The dispute relates to a assignment of 27 drums UTX 100 Yellow per S.S. Treneglas under I.G.M. No. 1837, Item No. 441, dated 6.4.1974. The second defendants were holders of an Import Licence No. P/S/1763444416 dated 20.8.1973 issued by the Joint Chief Controller of Imports, Kanpur. It is against this licence th...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »