Mumbai Court June 2003 Judgments

Vithal S/O Baba Since Deceased Through Lrs. Shevantabai W/O Vithal And ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(1)ALLMR903; 2004(2)BomCR850; 2003(1)MhLj81

Naresh H. Patil, J. 1. The petitioner - deceased Vithal Baba had initially filed an application under Section 32(1) of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1950') before the Tahsildar, Bhokar, District Nanded seeking eviction against his landlord Nawab Khan. The said proceedings had culminated and by a panchanama dated 20-11-1966, which is at page No. 49 of the Record and Proceedings, produced before this Court, he was put in possession of the suit land as the petitioner claimed to be a protected tenant of the suit property. The original landlord Nawab Khan had executed an agreement of sale in favour of present respondent No. 1 on 10-5-1967. It is alleged by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 that, the petitioner Vithal Baba had signed as a consenting party/witness to the agreement of sale executed between the original landlord and the present respondent No. 1. Thereafter, the original landlord Nawab Khan had executed a sale deed in fa...

Acc Machinery Company Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cen. Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 16,89,109/- and penalty of Rs. 12 lakhs imposed upon the applicant company arises out of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) who has dismissed the appeal filed before him against the order of the Addl. Commissioner on the ground of non compliance with his direction to pre-deposit the entire duty and penalty as adjudged by the Adjudicating authority.2. The issue in dispute relates to the correct classification of Bulkers whether under Chapter Heading 87.04 of Central Excise Tariff as claimed by the applicants or under Chapter Heading 87.07 as held by the Adjudicating authority.3. The pleas raised before us are that during the period in dispute viz., 11.2.97 to 18.8.98, the applicants were covered by Board's Circular No. 447/13/99-CX dated 22.3.99 which stated that the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Kamal Auto Industries [1996(82) ELT 5581 holding that insertion of the Chapter Note 3 in Chapter 87 of the Centr...

The Supreme Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cen. Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J) 1. For reasons recorded below, we proceed to hear and decide the appeals themselves with the consent of both sides, after waiving the pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 6,33,214.62 and penalty of Rs. 41,550/-. The details of the duty and penalty amounts are annexed to this order.2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of plastic moulded industrial components and in their manufacture of it, they received moulds free of cost from their customers. The appellants included the amortised mould cost into the value for the purpose of arriving at the assessable value of the goods manufactured by them in the light of CBEC circular F.No. 170/4/96-CX dated 23.1.96. Show cause notices were issued proposing to load the proportional mould cost and directing the appellants to produce Cost Accountant's certificate to that effect.Order-in-original were passed confirming the demands covered under 8 different show cause notices and penalties were also imposed on the ground...

Hindustan Ciba Geigy Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(167)ELT407Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Shri Naresh Thacker, ld. Advocate, appeared on behalf of the appellants and submitted that on the reverse of the Shipping Bill, the appellant have recorded that they are not claiming drawback. He, therefore, contended that there is no justification for imposition of redemption fine and penalty on the appellant. Shri S.V. Parelkar, ld.DR, appeared on behalf of the Revenue and he leaves it to the discretion of the Bench.2. After hearing both sides and perusal of the records, I do not find any justification for imposition of redemption fine and penalty. I, therefore, set aside the same with consequential relief, if any, to the appellants....

Satpute Tapi Parisar Ssk Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The question for consideration in this appeal is the determination of the value for assessment of the molasses arising in the appellant's factory and captively consumed by it in the manufacture of alcohol. The notice issued to it proposed not to accept the value declared by the appellant of Rs. 850/- per ton, apparently based on the cost of manufacture, and instead sought to enhance the value of Rs. 1310/- per ton, based upon the value at which Shirpur Sahakari Sakhar Khana Ltd, another sugar factory nearly, cleared the molasses from its factory.The Assistant Collector, whose order has been confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals), confirmed the proposal in the notice. Hence this appeal.2. It is the contention of the appellant that in the notice applying the provision of Rule 6(b)(2) of the Valuation Rules, which provided that the cost of comparable goods shall be the basis for value, regard has not been had to the fact that the molasses manufactured in the Shirpur factory is not of...

Shankar Manaji Jadhav (Since Deceased by His Heirs and Legal Represent ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)ALLMR543; 2004(1)BomCR210

Ranjana Desai, J. 1. In this writ petition, there is a challenge to the order dated 28th August, 1991 passed by the District Court, Satara, on Exhibit 57 in Darkhast No. 37 of 1985 in Regular Civil Suit No. 20 of 1981.2. The petitioners are original defendants. The respondent-original plaintiff had filed Regular Civil Suit No. 20 of 1981 for possession of the lands situated at village Khandala, Pargaon, District - Satara. On 29th June 1984, when the suit was called on for final hearing the petitioners and their advocates were absent and, hence, ex-parte decree came to be passed. It is an admitted fact that the petitioners did not take any steps for setting aside the ex-parte decree nor did they file any appeal.3. On 10th October 1985, the respondent filed Regular Darkhast No. 37 of 1985 and sought possession of the land. It is the case of the respondent that when he had gone to take possession of the land, the petitioners obstructed him and hence he filed an application under Section 4...

Ceat Limited (Electronics Division) Vs. Anand Aba Saheb Hawaldar and o ... Overruled

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(3)ALLMR828; 2004(1)BomCR451; (2003)IIILLJ268Bom; 2003(4)MhLj752

C.K. Thakker, C.J. 1. This appeal is filed against the judgment and order of the learned single Judge, dated July 11, 2001 in Writ Petition No. 1111 of 1997. By the said order, the learned single Judge confirmed the order passed by a Member of the Industrial Court, Thane, dated 24th October, 1996 in Complaint (ULP) No. 519 of 1996.2. Certain facts are not in dispute. On or about June 30, 1992, the Appellant Company declared a Voluntary Retirement Scheme ('first VRS' for short) for its employees, which was accepted by 337 employees. On March 16, 1994, the Appellant declared second VRS which was in the nature of Memorandum of Understanding ('MoU') ('second VRS' for short). That was accepted by 179 employees. Respondent Nos. 1 to 6 who had accepted first VRS of 1992 filed a complaint before the Industrial Court, Thane on July 20, 1994, alleging that the Company had committed unfair labour practice under item Nos. 5, 9 and 10 of the Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union...

Suja Agencies Vs. Uday Singh B. Rawat and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)BomCR488; 2003(4)MhLj687

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J. 1. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties.Perused the records. 2. The short point which arises for consideration in the matter is whetherthe respondent No. 1-workman who was offered the opportunity to join theservices unconditionally, having failed to join the services, can he still insist forbackwages on award being passed in his favour for his reinstatement in theservice. 3. Placing reliance in the decision of the learned single Judge of this Courtin the matter of Sonal Garments v. Trimbak Shankar Karve, reported in 2002(III) CLR 488, the learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that the LabourCourt has clearly held that from 3-34990 to 9-9-1992 the workman wasemployed with some other agency and for that period the workman would not beentitled for the backwages. However, while arriving at the said conclusion, theLabour Court has totally ignored the fact that the petitioners had offered to theworkman an opportunity to join the services unconditionall...

Brihanmumbai Mahanagar Palika Vs. Gangaram Muthyanna Mukadam and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(6)BomCR682; (2003)IIILLJ674Bom

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard the learned advocates for the parties. Perused the records.2. The petitioners are challenging the judgment and order dated February 22, 2000, passed in Appeal (IC) No. 22 of 1998 by the Industrial Court partly allowing the appeal filed by the petitioners against the judgment and order dated February 6, 1998 of the Labour Court, Mumbai, in Application (BIR) No. 116 of 1984. By the said order, the Labour Court had directed reinstatement of the respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent') with full back wages and continuity in service with effect from September 15, 1984. The Industrial Court partly allowed the appeal, modifying the order passed by the Labour Court to the extent of giving liberty to the petitioners to impose punishment instead of dismissal from service for the misconduct proved under Standing Orders 20(k) and 20(zi) while treating the respondent in continuous service with effect from September 15, 1984 and for his entitleme...

Jagson International Ltd. Vs. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(1)ARBLR663(Bom); 2004(2)BomCR272; 2003(4)MhLj733

D.K. Deshumukh, J. 1. These two petitions are directed against the same award made by the Arbitrators dated 13th November, 2000, Therefore, both these petitions can be conveniently disposed off by a common judgment. The facts that are material and relevant are as under.2. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. is a Government Company, engaged in the business of offshore and on-shore oil drilling and exploration activities. In order to carry out its business, it requires to take on charter from various Indian as well as foreign companies different types of oil rigs from time to time for various periods. For that purpose, ONGC invites tenders from foreign and Indian companies. The Indian companies are allowed to offer rigs which may not be owned by them but in respect of which they have entered into arrangements for charter with the owners thereof. M/s Jagson International Ltd. is a Company incorporated under the Belgium Companies Act. One of its business is to take on charger oil rigs fro...