Mumbai Court February 2003 Judgments

Shriniwas S/O Mulchand Ladniya Vs. Laxminarayan S/O Jainarayan Rathi a ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)93; I(2005)BC203; 2003BomCR(Cri)1469; 2003CriLJ3795; 2003(2)MhLj813

S.T. Kharche, J. 1. Rule taken up for final hearing with the consent of the parties.Heard Mr. Kothari, learned Advocate holding for Mr. A.M. Ghare, counsel for applicants, Mr. Paliwal, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 and Mr. Thakre, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No. 7 in both the applications.2. These two applications involve common questions of law and facts and, therefore, are being disposed of by this common judgment.3. These applications have been filed for quashing and setting aside the order, dated 17th August, 1998, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge in Criminal Revision Nos. 105 of 1997 and 106 of 1997, whereby he set aside the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class directing issuance of process against the respondent No. 1 in Criminal Case No. 13043 of 1994 for the offences punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and. under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.4. Mr. Kothari, learned Advocate, con...

Standard Chartered Bank Ltd. Vs. Grindlays Bank Employees Union and an ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2003(97)FLR760]; (2003)IILLJ512Bom

D.B. Bhosale, J.1. This petition is directed against the award dated October 29, 2002, passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. II, Mumbai, in Reference bearing no. CGIT- 2/49 of 2001. The dispute was referred by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, by order dated May 9, 2001 in exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (d) of Sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (for short, 'I.D. Act'). The reference reads thus:Whether the action of the management of Standard Chartered Grindlays Bank to transfer the award staff to RMC located at Byoulla in Mumbai is justified? If not to what relief is the workmen entitled?2. The Tribunal allowed the reference holding that the petitioner Bank is creating an artificial section in the name of Resources Management Centre and Area Manager Employees relation (for short RMC/AMER) by transferring the award employees there where there is no work, with the sole object of giving the work ...

Western Coalfields Ltd. Vs. Swati Industries

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2003Bom369; 2003(3)ALLMR551; 2004(1)BomCR322

J.N. Patel, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The appellant original defendant has impugned the order dated 3-4-1997 passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Chandrapur, directing the appellant-original defendant to pay Rs. 5,90686.31 paise by deducting the same and in case of its failure, to deposit the same within reasonable time, same amount is ordered to carry interest which is to be determined. The Court also observed that the application is decided without prejudice to the rights of the parties while deciding the remaining claim in the present suit. This order came to be passed on the application made by the respondent-original plaintiff seeking direction against the appellant-original defendant to deposit the said amount on the strength of the admission in the written statement filed in reply to the claim of the respondent-original plaintiff. In reply to para 6D of the plaint, the appellant-original defendant has contended as under : 'It is denied that...

Sunita Gowardhan Kutemate Vs. State of Maharashtra, Through Secretary ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(6)BomCR283

V.C. Daga, J.1. Writ Petition No. 1050 of 1998 has been filed by petitioner on 6-4-1998. The petitioner is working as a Primary Teacher with Zilla Parishad, Akola. She is seeking to challenge the order dated 6-11-1997 whereby the caste certificate issued in her favour come to be invalidated by the respondent No. 2, the Committee for scrutiny and verification of tribe claims, Nagpur. When this petition came up for motion hearing on 6-4-1998, the order was 'Notice before admission, returnable in two weeks.' No interim relief, as prayed for, was granted in favour of the petitioner. On the subsequent date of hearing i.e. 17-10-1998, this Court was pleased to send for records and proceedings only. The petition since April 1998 is pending for admission though it came up before this Court for hearing from time to time i.e. on 11-9-1998, 9-11-1998, 2-12-2002, 9-12-2002, 13-1-2003 and 28-1-2003.2. The learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 brought to our notice that the very same petitioner has f...

Prabhakar Vyankatesh Sangwai Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003BomCR(Cri)1421; (2003)105BOMLR935

S.T. Kharche, J.1. Rule is taken up for final hearing with consent of' parties.Heard Shri Dharmadhikari and Shri Gordey. learned Counsel for the applicants and Shri Thakare, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State. All these four criminal applications involve common questions of law and facts and take an exception to the order dated 23.11.1998 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate rejecting the discharge applications of the applicants under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for want of sanction to prosecute the applicants and. therefore, all are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Brief facts are as under :Applicant Prabhakar Sangwai is working as a Senior Clerk in the office of Employees Stale Insurance Scheme, Amravati. Applicant Uttani Ingle is working as a Peon in the Department of Medical and Health Services of Government of Maharashtra and at the relevant time was working as officiating Junior/Senior Clerk in the office of the ...

Dilip Anand Sakpal Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application is for waiver of deposit of penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs imposed on the applicant under Section 112 of the Act.2. The penalty has been imposed on the applicant on the finding of the Commissioner that the applicant who was employed at watchman in the Foreign Post Office colluded in the illegal removal of gold that was imported by various persons from the post parcels which were lying for clearance in order to take away the goods, concealed such removal by substituting dates.3. We do not prima facie accept the contention of the counsel for the applicant on merits that he has been falsely implicated. The records indicated prima facie that when the officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence visited the foreign post office on the night of 6.3.2000, the doors of the room in which the parcels were kept were open and the applicant was present on the forth floor, where he had no business. The contention of the counsel for the applicant that the applicant had handed over t...

Asia Industrial Technologies Vs. Commr. of Cus.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(159)ELT604Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appeal is against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) confirming the order of the Additional Commissioner confiscating under Clause (m) of Section 111 of the Act of coaxial cables that the appellant imported for clearance from the Air Cargo Complex, at Sahar, permitting them to be redeemed them on payment of fine of Rs. 3.47 lakhs and imposing a penalty under Section 112 of the Act of Rs. 1.90 lakh.2. The appellant placed an order on a supplier in Geneva for supply of three consignments of coaxial cables at US$ 240 per 1,000 feet. The goods were supplied to it by Comm Scope Inc. of the United States of America. In the bills of entry that the appellant filed at the air cargo complex for clearance of these goods, it declared the value to be US$ 238.16 per 1,000 feet and enclosed an invoice issued by Comm Scope Inc showing the price to be this. The department's enquiries show that the actual price was to be US$ 240. Notice therefore proposing confiscation of the goods and pena...

Pidilite Industries Ltd. Vs. S.M. Associates and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(5)BomCR295; 2004(28)PTC193(Bom)

S.J. Vazifdar, J.1. The Plaintiff has filed this suit to restrain the first Defendant from infringing its copyright in its artistic work and its registered trade mark 'M-Seal' and for passing off.2.From 1968 Mahindra Van Wijk and Visser Ltd. commenced use of the trade mark M-SEAL in respect of its goods.On 21st September, 1970, one K.E. Motiwala, a partner of Defendant No.1 was employed as an engineer by Mahendra Van Wijk and Visser Limited, which was later named as Mahindra Electrochemical Products Ltd. (MEPL).M.E.P.L. applied for and obtained with effect from 16.8.1972 registration of the trade mark 'M-Seal' (lable mark) under registration No.282, 168 in Class-I in respect of epoxy resin compositions included in Class-I used for cementing cracks, holes, leaks and similar defects in metal articles and for other technical purposes. The certificate stated that the registration shall give no right to the exclusive use of the word 'Seal'. The mark was also stated to be associated with No....

Shri Balkrishna Shivappa Shetty Vs. Shri Mahesh Nenshi Bhakta,

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2003Bom293; 2003(2)ALLMR444; 2003(4)BomCR45; 2003(3)MhLj47

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Perused the records. Rule. By consent, rule is made returnable forthwith.2. The petitioner challenges the order dated 17-9-2002 passed by the trial Court allowing the application filed by the respondent Nos. 1 and 3 for recall of the defendant No. 1 in the suit for the purpose of cross-examination on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 to 3. The order is purportedly passed in exercise of powers under Order 18, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'.3. Placing reliance in two decisions of this Court one in the matter of Madhubhai Amthalal v. Amthalal Nanalal and Ors., reported in AIR (34) 1947 Bom 156, and Steelage Industries Limited and Anr. v. Smt. Chander Bagain, reported in : AIR1992Bom406 , the learned Advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the trial Court has no jurisdiction to recall the witness for the purpose of cross-examination by either of the parties and th...

Saibaba Flour Mills Ltd., Through Kanhayyalal Walecha, Vs. National Co ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(2)ALLMR3; 2003(4)BomCR62

C.K. Thakker, C.J.1. Rule Mr. Iqbal Chagla, learned senior advocate with Mr. S.M. Gorwadkar, appear and waive service of rule on behalf of National Co-operative Consumers Federation of India Ltd. Mr. V.A. Gangal, learned counsel, appears and waives service of rule on behalf of Food Corporation of India and Senior Regional Manager, Food Corporation of India, in all petitions. The matters have been taken up for final hearing.2. In all these petitions, an action taken by the Food Corporation of India (FCI) and Senior Regional Manager (FCI), respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in Writ Petition No. 7468 of 2002, of giving contract to National Co-operative Consumers Federation of India Limited (Federation), respondent No. 1 in Writ Petition No 7468 of 2002, is challenged. To appreciate the contentions raised in all the petitions, few relevant facts in the first petition i.e. Writ Petition No. 7468 of 2002 may now be stated.Petitioner is a consumer of foodgrains for manufacture of flour from Food Corpora...