Mumbai Court June 2003 Judgments

Sunrise Structurals and Engg. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This group of 12 appeals have been filed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Nagpur demanding as under: 7. Shri Sanjay Agarwal Director, Sunrise Structurals & Engg.Ltd. E/Stav-3264/02 2. The appellant in Appeal No. 3185/2002 is manufacturing transmission towers. It entered into a contract with Maharashtra Steel Rolling Mills Ltd. (appellant in Appeal No. 3182/2002) whereby the latter agreed to supply angles to KEC. In its turn the appellant in Appeal No. 3182/02 would procure angles from Sunrise Structurals and Engg. Ltd. (the appellant in Appeal No. 3284/02). The said appellant Sunrise it is stated even though it had manufacturing abilities and capabilities, was not working during the period in question (May 1999 to March 2000). The said appellant Sunrise Structurals invoiced on KEC showing it as the consignee and buyer as Maharashtra Steel Rolling Mills Ltd. The said appellant in Appeal No. 3284/02 i.e. Sunrise Structurals procures th...

Coates of India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appeals are against common order of the Commissioner (Appeals) impugned in these appeals, disposing of the two appeals before him.2. The Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed one of the two appeals filed before him on the ground that it was barred by limitation. The representative of the appellant says that it was likely that condonation of delay was asked for. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) does not say any such thing. The statement of facts of the memorandum of appeal contained in appeal 1575/98 does not say so, only contending that the Commissioner has not taken into account the merits of the issues only addresses arguments on limitation. In other words, no ground is made out for interference with the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissing the appeal.4. The issue in the other appeal is entitlement to credit on the basis of two certified copies of the invoice cum challan issued by the Indian Oil Corporation. The credit has been denied on the ground that these two ...

Rajesh Ramrao Raut Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)143; 2003BomCR(Cri)1073; 2003CriLJ4174

Palshikar J.1. By this petition, the petitioner has challenged his detention under Section 151 of Criminal Procedure Code 1973 by police station Palghar during the Ganesh Festival of the year 1996. He was detained from 15th September 1996 to 21st September 1996 and was released thereafter.2. The basis contention on behalf of the petitioner is that this order of detention is totally without jurisdiction and void and therefore his detention becomes illegal. The order, according to the petitioner, is therefore liable to be quashed.3. On 15th September 1996 the police officer made a report to Judicial Magistrate First Class, Palghar, praying for extension of time and to detain the petitioner beyond the period of 24 hours as he was a known criminal and was an extremist, who move around with knife etc. would create havoc during the Ganesh festival going on in village Safala. The learned Magistrate considering the report made by the police under Section 151(3) of Cr.P.C. accepted the contenti...

Union Bank of India, a Nationalised Bank, Through Its Chairman and Man ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(1)BomCR392; (2003)IIILLJ1001Bom

C.K. Thakker, C.J. 1. Admitted Mr. D.J. Bhanage, learned Counsel, appears and waives service of notice of admission on behalf of respondent No. 1. Mr. R.S. Apte, learned Counsel, appears and waives service of notice of admission on behalf of respondents No. 2 and 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is taken up for final hearing.2. This appeal is directed against an order dated August 30, 2002 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 1479 of 1996. The said petition was filed by the 1st respondent herein being aggrieved by an order refusing to refer the matter to Industrial Tribunal for adjudication under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'(.3. The first respondent union is a union of employees working with the appellant bank. It raised an industrial dispute vide its letter, dated August 3, 1992 against the appellant bank challenging unilateral decision of the bank of increasing rate of interest in clear loans being...

In Re: Scheme of Amalgamation of Indusind Enterprises and Finance Ltd. ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)ALLMR606; I(2004)BC615; [2004]120CompCas457(Bom); (2003)4CompLJ80(Bom); 2003(4)MhLj835; [2004]50SCL68(Bom)

D.G. Karnik, J.1. IndusInd Enterprises and Finance Limited (for short, the 'transferor company'), the petitioner in Company Petition No. 1085 of 2002, has filed this petition for sanction of the scheme of arrangement under which the petitioner company is proposed to be merged and amalgamated with IndusInd Bank Limited (for short the 'transferee company'). The transferee company has filed the Company Petition No. 1086 of 2002 for sanction of the scheme of arrangement of the amalgamation of the transferor company into it.2. In pursuance of the directions issued by this court on 19th September, 2002 in Company Application No. 439 of 2002, a meeting of the members of the equity shareholders of the transferor company was held on 28th October, 2002. In the said meeting, the resolution approving the proposed merger of the transferor company with the transferee company was passed by the requisite majority of members. 159 members holding 5,85,81,800 shares voted in favour of the resolution and ...

Mumbai Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs. Minister for State ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)ALLMR581; 2003(4)BomCR479; 2003(4)MhLj746

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J. 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the respondent No. 1. None present for respondent No. 2 and 3, though served.2. Limited challenge to the impugned judgment in the case in hand is related to the absence of jurisdiction to the Electrical Engineer under Section 24(2) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 to deal with the cases more particularly in relation to stopped meters or correctness or incorrectness of the meter provided to consumers for recording the consumption of electric supply.3. Few facts relevant for the decision are that pursuant to the inspection it was revealed to the petitioners that the meter supplied to the respondent No. 2 for recording of consumption of electric supply had stopped working since October, 1993, a supplementary bill on the basis of average monthly consumption was issued by the petitioner to the respondent on 12-6-1996 for the period from 16-9-1995 to 3-4-1996. Pursuant to the representation by the respondent No. ...

Lingu S/O Dharma Meshram Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)MhLj789

R.S. Mohite, J. 1. Heard Shri Somalkar, learned Advocate for the appellant and Shri Patel, learned A.P.P. for the respondent - State. 2. By this appeal, the appellant (hereinafter referred to as accused) Lingu Dharma Meshram seeks to quash and set aside the judgment and order dated 30-11-2001 passed by the 2nd Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur, passed in Sessions Case No. 100 of 2000. By the impugned judgment and order, the accused has been convicted for offences under Sections 326 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. For the offence under Section 326 of Indian Penal Code, he has been sentenced to suffer R. I. for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to undergo further S. I. for one month. For the offence under Section 201 of Indian Penal Code, he has been sentenced to suffer R. I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 300/-, in default to undergo S. I. for 10 days. Both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. 3. The brief facts of the case are as...

indusind Enterprises and Finance Ltd. Vs. Indusind Bank Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)BomCR482

Karnik D.G., J.1. IndusInd Enterprises and Finance Limited (for short, the 'transferor company'), the petitioner in Company Petition No. 1085 of 2002, has filed this petition for sanction of the scheme of arrangement under which the petitioner company is proposed to be merged and amalgamated with IndusInd Bank Limited (for short the 'transferee company'). The transferee company has filed the Company Petition No. 1086 of 2002 for sanction of the scheme of arrangement of the amalgamation of the transferor company into it.2. In pursuance of the directions issued by this Court on 19th September, 2002 in Company Application No. 439 of 2002, a meeting of the members of the equity shareholders of the transferor company was held on 28th October, 2002. In the said meeting, the resolution approving the proposed merger of the transferor company with the transferee company was passed by the requisite majority of members. 159 members holding 5,85,81,800 shares voted in favour of the resolution and ...

Anna Krishan Natulkar and ors. Vs. Shri Ramu Gannu Patil and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)ALLMR881; 2004(1)BomCR390

A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. This writ petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India, takes exception to the judgment and order passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal Pune Camp Kolhapur, dated June 18, 1987 in Revision No. MRT SS/157/84.2. The land in question is situated at village Shrishi, Taluka Shirala, District Sangli bearing Survey No. 372/2 and 372/3. Undisputedly the said lands were in possession of one Dnyanu Dhondi Patil since 1947-48 as a tenant. It is the case of the Petitioners that since Dnyanu Dhondi Patil was having excess land, told the predecessor of the Petitioners Anna Krishna Natulkar to cultivate 2 share sin the suit lands and that he would cultivate one share thereof. The Petitioners further assert that above arrangement was arrived at between the parties in the presence of landlord Dinkar Waman Habasnis in or around 1948. According to the Petitioners since they were in possession of the suit lands on the tillers day i.e. 1-4-1957 they were entitled to be decl...

Sujata Mukunda Manerao Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004ACJ1103; 2003(3)MhLj571

R.K. Batta, J.1. Petitioner has invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court on account of death of her son Rajesh in the Central Prison, Nagpur. Initially, an affidavit of only Superintendent, Central Prison, Nagpur alone was filed. The affidavits of Medical Officer who attended on the deceased were not filed. Therefore, this Court had directed that affidavits of the Medical Officers be filed and in addition the Secretary, Home Department was also directed to file an affidavit. The main object behind directing the Secretary, Home Department to file the affidavit was that he should look into the matter personally and after ascertaining the correct position, file an affidavit before the Court.2. We have heard Miss. Tajwar Khan, the learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mrs. Jog, the learned A.P.P. for the State. The learned Advocate for the petitioner has argued that the deceased died on account of negligence and lack of medical treatment on the part of the jail authorities and that even a...