Mumbai Court January 2003 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.
Sewakram S/O Jangali Tembhare Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)52; 2003BomCR(Cri)1663; 2003(3)MhLj19
R.S. Mohite, J. 1. Heard Shri Naidu, Advocate for the appellant and Shri Dhote, APP for the respondent.2. This appeal is filed for quashing and setting aside the judgment and order dated 30-1-2002 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Gondia, in Sessions Trial No. 7 of 1998, convicting the present appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'accused') for an offence punishable under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years.3. The brief facts of the prosecution which appear from the record are as under :(a) The prosecutrix Imlabai Rahangdale was at the time of incident a married woman aged about 26 years with two children. On the date and time of incident, she was residing in her house at village Nangpura, Taluqa - Amgaon, along with her son and daughter.(b) According to Imlabai on the date of incident i.e. on 13-1...
Dattatray Gopal Upadhye Since Deceased Through His Legal Heirs and Rep ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR1149; 2003(3)BomCR861; 2003(3)MhLj109
S.A. Babde, J.1. This petition by a tenant questions the judgment and order dated 21-6-1986 passed by the IInd Addl. District Judge, Nasik, confirming the decree of eviction passed by the trial Court. 2. The original petitioner was a tenant of one room admeasuring about 5' x 5' on the eastern side of a double storeyed building. The agreed rate is Rs. 6/- per month and the tenancy commenced on the 14th of each month ending on the 13th of the subsequent month. The respondents resided at Indore and they have major sons. The respondents served a notice dated 1-12-1975 on the petitioner and demanded vacant possession and arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 6.60 per month being the amount of rent as well as education cess. The petitioner replied to the notice and refused to vacate. Hence, the respondents instituted a suit for possession and recovery of Rs. 46.20 as arrears and future mesne profits along with notice charge of Rs. 25/-.3. There were other grounds for eviction alleged by the res...
Sierra International Shipping Corpn. Vs. M.V. Umka and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Bom265; 2003(2)ALLMR37; 2003(6)BomCR723
R.I. Rebello, J.1. The plaintiffs had moved this Court for an ex parte warrant of arrest against the 1st defendant and for some other consequential reliefs. An order came to be passed on 8th January 2003 in terms of the Judge's Order. Defendant No. 3 the owner of the 1st defendant vessel has moved this Court for vacating the said order on the ground that there is no cause of action.2. A few facts may be set out which would enable this Court to resolve the issue in controversy.The issue : Can a ship be caused to be arrested by a party to a charter party which has been terminated or come to an end, in an action in rem, without such party having a maritime lien and without the despondent owner being a demise charterer.The plaintiffs are a company organized under foreign laws. The 1st defendant vessel is a tug flying a Russian flag and at the time of arrest was within the jurisdiction of this Court. The 2nd and 3rd Defendant's have been described merely as foreign organizations, having the...
Hanmant Ramhari Ghodake Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)34; 2003BomCR(Cri)847; 2003CriLJ4368; 2003(3)MhLj584
V.G. Palshikar, J. 1. These two appeals are directed against the order of conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur convicting them in Sessions Case No. 104 of 1999 under Section 376 read with Section 109 of Indian Penal Code and to suffer imprisonment for seven years and fine. The learned Judge also proceeded to convict accused Nos. 1 and 2 under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 read with Section 109 of Indian Penal Code and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and fine. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. It is this order dated 22-9-1999 which is challenged by both the accused independently. Appeal No. 541 of 1999 is preferred by original accused No. 2 - Hanmant Ghodake and Appeal No. 542 of 1999 is preferred by original accused No. 1 - Bhausaheb Humbe.2. The case of the prosecution is that accused No. 1 committed forcible intercourse on prosecutrix without her consent and ...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shreelata Mohanrao Tupkar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: I(2004)ACC539; 2003(4)ALLMR302; 2004(2)BomCR462
1. Dr. Mohanrao Tupkar, who was employed under the Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad, as Medical Officer and attached to the Primary Health Centre at Wadod Bazar in Sillod Taluka, was travelling in a Jeep on 15-12-1997 and at about 7.15 p.m. when the said Jeep was stopped near Khamgaon Phata bridge he got down from the said vehicle and went to attend nature's call. While he was returning towards the said Jeep by crossing the road, another Jeep (Trax) bearing Registration No. MH-20-A-7832 coming from Aurangabad side dashed him as a result of which he expired on the spot. One Anis Khan Pathan was the driver of the said Trax.2. The dependants of the deceased i.e. wife, mother and children filed a claim petition under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Aurangabad, which came to be registered as M.A. C.P. No. 111/98, and claimed an amount of Rs. 23,50,000/- from the driver, owner and Insurer of the said vehicle. The driver...
Yatan Pharmaceutical Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Cus. and C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-15-2003
Reported in: (2003)(154)ELT250Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These three appeals are filed by the same appellants, as the issues are the same. These are, therefore, disposed of vide this single order.2. The appellants manufacture medicaments. They filed the declaration claiming these to be Patent and Proprietary medicines, claiming classification under sub-heading 3003.10. The department was of the opinion that these were generic medicaments classifiable under sub-heading 3003.20 at nil rate of duty. The Assistant Commissioner modified the declaration modifying classifications. In doing so, he relied upon the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Astra Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh - 1995 (75) E.L.T. 214. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld this order. He held that all the marks appearing on the medicaments and on the packing were "house marks" and not brand names. Following the same judgment of the Supreme Court, he dismissed the appeal. Appeal No. E/1947/R/97 is filed against this order.3. In two other o...
Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. United Spring Mfg. Co.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-15-2003
Reported in: (2003)(162)ELT497Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Denial of credit by the Assistant Commissioner was reversed by the Commissioner on the following observation: "The submissions and the impugned order have been considered by me carefully. The issue involved in this appeal is regarding the admissibility of the Modvat credit of Rs. 44,708/- availed by the appellant on the basis of dealer's invoices which are alleged to be not valid documents as the time of which are alleged to be not valid documents as the time of removal and the other particulars relating to quantity and assessable value were not incorporated. It has also been mentioned in the order that subsequently appellants got these details incorporated but the lower authority failed to accept the same and denied the credit. It is observed that the goods were cleared by M/s. Sun Flag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. Bhandara under invoices issued under Rule 52A. The goods were first consigned to the depot, which got registered also with the Central Excise Department for issue of 'Modv...
Syntex Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-15-2003
Reported in: (2003)(160)ELT207Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These 11 applications relate to 11 appeals arising out of the same order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication). These are therefore disposed of vide this single order.2. The Pass Book Scheme is one of the several schemes to promote exports. All manufacturer-exporter and certain specified Merchant-exporters notified in para 54 of the EXIM Policy qualify for this scheme. An officer of the DGFT nominated as 'Designated Authority' issues the blank Pass Book. The Standard Input Output Norms (SION) are given in the Handbook. Serial number of the SION is noted by the exporter in the Shipping Bills. The Custom officers would examine the serial number of SION shown and on being satisfied would pass the shipping bill. After export is completed the exporter would approach the designated authority who would give credit as calculated as per his formulae and record the same in the Pass Book. On import of any goods (not necessarily notified in the SION) the Pass Book holder can pay...
Naresh Sukhwani Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Adj.)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-15-2003
Reported in: (2003)(156)ELT214Tri(Mum.)bai
1. After hearing both sides for some time on the applications for waiver of pre-deposit of penalties imposed upon the applicants by the Commissioner of Customs in the impugned order (as per details shown in the annexure to this order), we find it possible to hear and decide the appeals themselves, hence; after waiving pre-deposits, we proceed to dispose of the appeals themselves with the consent of both sides.2. By the impugned Order-in-Original No. 178/2002/CAC/CC/ MD, dated 3-4-2002, duty demand has been confirmed on M/s. Sunshine Enterprises, Hyderabad and Shri K.V. Raghavacharyulu for the same reasons. Penalties have been imposed on other persons for various acts of omission or commission, rendering the watch modules liable to confiscation.3. It is the plea of the ld. Counsel appearing for the appellants that while the show cause notices were issued and made answerable to the Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo, Sahar, in respect of goods, which had been imported at Sahar, Air Carg...
Noorkhan S/O Jafarkhan Vs. Sk. Jakeer Sk. Akbar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-15-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)65; 2003BomCR(Cri)860
N.V. Dabholkar, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the applicantand respondent No.1, who are genuinely contestingparties. Shri Naik, learned APP has supported thearguments of respondent No.1, being the originalowner and consequently prayed for upholding theimpugned order.2. Rule. By consent, Rule is madereturnable forthwith.3. Order passed by the learned II JudicialMagistrate F.C. Nanded on 21.11.2002 directingreturn of vehicle no.MH-21/3445 by applicant infavour of respondent No.1 is being challenged bypresent application under Section 482 of theCriminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) read withArticle 227 of the Constitution of India.Admittedly respondent No.1 (Sk.Jakeer)is the owner of the vehicle in question. It isclaim of applicant (Noorkhan) that by an agreementof sale executed on 11.9.2000 respondent No.1agreed to sell the vehicle to him for considerationof Rs.4,11,786/ by accepting the partconsideration of Rs.1,55,483/ and it was agreedthat the balance consideration would be satisfiedb...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »