Mumbai Court February 2003 Judgments

Milind S/O Prabhakar Rokade Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003BomCR(Cri)1448; 2003(2)MhLj735

S.T. Karche, J. 1. Rule taken up for final hearing with the consent of the parties.2. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.P.P. for respondent No. 1 and the learned counsel for respondent No. 2 in both the applications.3. These two applications involve common question of facts and law and, therefore, they are disposed of by this common judgment. The short question that arises for consideration in these proceedings is whether interim custody of the motor vehicle can be given pending the criminal prosecution.4. Applicant/accused Milind is the nephew of complainant Arvind. Both of them contended that the Hero Honda Motorcycle is owned by them and, therefore, sought the release of the said motorcycle on supratnama by filing applications before the learned J.M.F.C., whereby the applications filed by both of them came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by the said order, criminal revisions were filed in the Court of Sessions Judge and the said criminal revisions were also dism...

Jesmajo Industrial Fabrications - Karnataka Pvt. Ltd. a Company Incorp ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)ALLMR162; 2003(3)ARBLR289(Bom); 2003(5)BomCR676; 2003(3)MhLj786

F.I. Rebello, J. 1. The applicants have moved under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. It is their case that there is an arbitral clause in the contract between the parties. The applicants invoked the arbitral clause by their letter dated 16th March, 2001. The Respondents failed to nominate the arbitrator. As the respondents had failed to nominate their arbitrator, the present application was filed invoking the provisions under Section 11(6) of the Act. Under Section 11(6) it is contended that it would not be the named arbitrator in the contract who is to be appointed as arbitrator but it is open to the designated authority or to the chief Justice to nominate an impartial person to decide the disputes including the claims and counter claims of the parties. This power can be spelt out from the language of Section 11 and can be resorted to in the event a person or authority referred to under the arbitral clause chooses to abdicate its duty or responsibilities to nomi...

Mohamed Enshael Vs. Shri K.P. Gundecha, Superintendent Customs (P) and

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(1)BomCR465

J.G. Chitre, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties in detail in context with the evidence on record. 2. The appellant is hereby assailing the correctness, propriety and legality of the judgment and order passed by Special Judge in N.D.P.S. Case No. 5 of 1996 wherein he convicted the appellant for committing the offence punishable under the provisions of Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for convenience). The appellant has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years and to pay fine of Rs. 1 lac, in default to undergo RI for two years in respect of the offence indicated by provisions of Section 18 of the NDPS Act.3. The prosecution case in brief is that on 27.10.1995 at about 5.30 p.m. Superintendent, Customs (Preventive), Head Quarters, Pune, Shri Gundecha, received the information that one person named Parvej Dhulha Khan (who happens to be accused No. 1 in the above said special case) was to come with opium ...

Dora Processors Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(182)ELT255Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The basic issue raised in these appeals is the same i.e. durability of processed embroidery. Accordingly, they are considered and disposed of together under this common order.2. The assessees undertake processing of embroidery. The question arose as to whether such processing would be liable to duty under heading 5805 of Central Excise Tariff in view of Note 8 in Chapter 58. That Note reads as under :- "In relation to fabrics of this Chapter bleaching, mercerizing, dyeing, printing, water proofing, shrink proofing, tentering, heat-setting, crease resistant, organdie processing or any other process or any one or more of these processes shall amount to manufacture." In appeal No. E-603-R/99-Mum, in the case of M/s. Encee Dyeing & Printing Works, Revenue is in appeal against the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) that embroidery is not fabric and consequently Note 8 which is in relation to fabrics, has no application to embroidery. In appeals E/1145-1146/2000-Mum, M/s. Dora Pr...

Mpi Ethicals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application is for waiver of deposit of duty of Rs. 7,45,819/- and penalty of Rs. 50,000/-. The duty and penalty have been demanded and imposed on the ground that the value of the physician samples of medicaments that the applicant manufactured and cleared for free distribution did not include the cost of their packing.2. Counsel for the applicant explains that the value of physician samples has been determined, proportionate to the quantity, on the value of the same medicament which was cleared for sale. Thus, Astharid tablets for sale, in packing of 100, consisting of 10 strips containing 10 tablets each were valued at Rs. 66.24. The same tablet, when sold in a packing of four, in a catch cover has been valued proportionately to Rs. 2.24. He contends therefore that the cost of packing has been included and relies upon a certificate, issued by a chartered accountant, confirming this. He further contends that the extended period of limitation which covers the demand except for ...

Palod Machines Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. One of the grounds raised in this appeal by the importer against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is that she has not considered the various submissions that were raised before her.2. After hearing both parties, we have necessarily to accept this contention. The question before the Commissioner (Appeals) was the includability in the assessable value of the parts of looms that the importer imported, of the royalty and payment for technical services that the importer permits the collaborator in Korea, that it contracted to pay to that collaborator. In the appeal that was filed against the order of the Commissioner confirming the includability of these amounts, the appellant had raised number of issues. It was contended in the appeal that the value should have been determined in terms of Rule 4(1), not in terms of Rule 8; the determination of value in terms of Rule 8 was prohibited by the Valuation Rules; it is not a condition of sale that the payment of the amount was not requ...

Shri Ambicapratapsinh Sisodia Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and R.S. Pillai ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(2)ALLMR18; 2003(4)BomCR696; 2003(2)MhLj806

R.M. Lodha, J.1. Heard Mr. Milind Sathe, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.S. Apte, learned counsel for the respondents.2. Assailing the order of the Appellate Authority dated 9.08.1991 under Section 33 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short, 'Act of 1976'), confirming the order of the Competent Authority dated 8.4.1985 whereby final statement under Section 9 of the Act of 1976 was issued by the Competent Authority, two fold submission was advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner: (i) that under the Building Regulations, the petitioner is required to keep as open space two third of the area of the entire land for the enjoyment of such building and accordingly under Section 2(g)(i), the petitioner is entitled to 500 sq. mts. as land appurtenant to each structure and, therefore, the Competent Authority committed error in declining the petitioner to retain area to that extent and (ii) that the petitioner has already made an application for exe...

The Kolhapur District Central Cooperative Bank Limited Vs. Maharashtra ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(2)ALLMR1; 2003(4)BomCR582; (2003)IILLJ913Bom

R.M. Lodha, J.1. These two writ petitions raise identical question about the applicability of the Bombay Labour Welfare Fund Act, 1953 and, therefore, were heard together and are disposed of by this common order.2. In writ petition No. 3753/1994 the Kolhapur District Central Co-operative Bank Limited is the petitioner while in writ petition No. 5172/1994, Satara District Central Cooperative Bank Limited is the petitioner. Both the petitioners are Central Banks under Sub-section (6) of Section 2 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The case of the petitions is that they were constituted for promotion of the economic interest and general welfare of its members or the public in general in accordance with the cooperative principles. The formation and constitution of the Bank is explained by submitting that the credit structure obtaining in Maharashtra is of three Tier system consisting of the Primary Rural and Urban societies at the base, district Central banks at the intermedi...

Baliram Ramchandra Majgaonkar Vs. the District and Sessions Judge and ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(2)ALLMR10; 2003(4)BomCR584

R.M. Lodha, J.1. Baliram Ramchandra Majgaonkar petitioner joined his service as junior clerk in the District Court, Solapur in the year 1967. He was promoted to the post of senior clerk in the year 1985. The petitioner was charged of having misappropriated an amount of Rs. 30135.60 ps. during the period from 1.3.1986 to 31.5.1988. The charge was indeed serious and accordingly he was suspended pending departmental proceedings. Disciplinary proceedings were completed and ultimately the petitioner was found guilty of having misappropriated the amount of Rs. 30,315/-. In other words, the charge of misconduct relating to misappropriation of Government money to the tune of Rs. 30,315/- was found proved. Despite the gravity of charge, by order dated 17.11.1990, the petitioner was awarded punishment of compulsory retirement only. The petitioner appeals to have claimed for compassionate pension under the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982 (for short, 'Rules of 1982'). His claim wa...

Yogendra Bhagatram Sachdev Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Shri Shamb ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)21; III(2003)BC158; 2003BomCR(Cri)810

A.S. Aguiar, J.1. By this application, presumably under Section482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, theapplicant seeks to invoke the exercise of powersvested in this Court Ex Debito Justitiae to preventapprehended abuse of the procedural law andmiscarriage of justice from taking place. Theapprehension arises allegedly on account of the orderpassed by the Sessions Court, Bombay, rejectingMiscellaneous Application No. 376 of 2000 underSection 391 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.The appellant sought to examine himself on oath inorder to enable him to discharge the burden to rebutthe presumption of law under Sections 138 and 139 ofthe Negotiable Instruments Act. The saidMiscellaneous Application No. 376 of 2000 is filed inCriminal Appeal No. 330 of 2001 from the order dated26.11.2002 passed by the leaned MetropolitanMagistrate, 28th Court, Esplanade, in C.C. No.1173/S/95 convicting the Appellant - accused YogendraBhagatram Sachdev under Section 138 of the NegotiableInstrume...