Mumbai Court January 2004 Judgments

Kimberly-clark Lever Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Appellants are manufacturers of diapers and clear the goods for sale to the depots of C & F agents M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd. (HCL). From these depots the goods are sold to wholesale buyers. In Sept. 1997, for a "promotional pack" containing diapers of size Medium, large and Extra Large, they declared a lower price than the prices for a normal pack.This "promotional pack" was with an offer of one 'Pears Soap' free, to the consumer, with each Medium, Large and Extra Large pack. This was indicated in print on the "promotional pack". Duty was paid on such reduced prices declared. While effecting the sale of this "promotional pack" to the dealers, they were also sold and billed separately for the price of the Pears soap being traded by them.2. Valuation of the "promotional pack" is questioned by raising the reduced prices, to the price of corresponding packs. Hence this appeal. a) The sale of the Pears soap to the wholesale buyer is compulsory or not is to be established. If it is c...

Hy-line International Vs. C and M Hy-line Farms P. Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: IV(2004)BC424; [2004]120CompCas337(Bom); (2004)2CompLJ503(Bom); 2004(3)MhLj922; [2004]52SCL416(Bom)

A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. By this application, the applicant-company prays that it be permitted to intervene and to file affidavits and be heard at the admission and at every stage of the petition and in all proceedings concerning thereto. The basis on which intervention is sought is that the applicant-company has vital interest in the affairs of the C and M Hy-Line Farms Pvt. Ltd., which is proposed to be would up by Company Petition No. 158 of 2003 on the ground purported to be under Section 433(e) and 433(f) of the Companies Act. According to the applicant, the applicant-company is a shareholder of the said company and is also a joint venture partner along with the petitioner. Besides, the applicant-company is a creditor as well as a guarantor of the company proposed to be wound up. It is, therefore, asserted that the applicant-company has vital interest in the proceedings and any order passed in these proceedings may prejudice the applicant. Besides, it is asserted that the present com...

Shobha Satyanarayan Birla Vs. Janabai Parshuram Pawar Since Deceased b ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(2)ALLMR751; 2004(3)BomCR557; 2004(2)MhLj1082

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. A suit for eviction was in the present case instituted in the Court of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Phaltan on the ground of arrears of rent. The suit came to be decreed on 5th September, 1986. The decree has been reversed in appeal by the Additional District Judge, Satara on 20th March, 1990.2. The only issue which arises in this proceeding and that has been urged before the Court is as to whether there is in fact a relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. If such a relation does indeed exist, the decree for eviction has to be passed in the facts of this case on the ground of the non payment of rent. The suit has been instituted under the Rent Act and such a suit was therefore maintainable if, and only if, there exists a relationship of landlord and tenant. The suit, it must be emphasised, was not under the general law for the recovery of possession. Therefore, the answer to the question as to whether the Additional District Judge was or was...

Kusha Laxman Waghmare Vs. the State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004CriLJ2251

V.G. Palshikar J.1. Being aggrieved by the order dated 21-5-1999 passed by the Sessions Judge Raigad in Sessions Case No. 127 of 1998 holding the accused guilty under Section 302 IPC and punishing him to suffer R.I. for life, the appellant has preferred this appeal through jail.2. Since the accused was not duly represented, Ms. D.M. Shah was appointed as advocate to represent the accused/appellant. With the assistance of the learned advocate and the learned A.P.P. we have scrutinised the record and reappreciated the evidence on record. The prosecution case stated briefly is that on 2nd March 1998 at 9 p.m. within the limits of village Karanjghar Katakarwadi, Taluka Sudhagad, District Raigad the accused killed his wife Anusuya by means of wooden bar, hitting her very severally on the chest at the back. As a result of which beating several ribs were broken and there was internal bleeding and due to congestion she died. The complaint was accordingly lodged and the police conducted the inv...

Hy-line International Vs. C and M Hy-line Farms (P) Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(2)BomCR10; (2004)2CompLJ506(Bom)

ORDERA.M. Khanwilkar, J.1.-This petition is filed under sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act praying for winding up of the company, named, 'C & M Hy-Line Farms (P) Ltd.' having registered office at C & M House, N.D. Patel Road, Nasik-422001. The petitioner is a partnership firm formed under the laws of Iowa, USA. The petitioner along with one C & M Farming Ltd., who has intervened in this petition (hereinafter referred to as the 'Intervener Company' for the sake of brevity) an India based company, entered into joint venture to form the company which is proposed to be wound up by this petition, viz., C & M Hy-Line Farms (P) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'company' for the sake of brevity). It is not necessary to burden this judgment with the terms and conditions of the joint venture agreement. Suffice it to point out that under the said agreement, the petitioner was obliged to supply grandparent birds to the joint venture 'company' in India on a continuous basis, as can be discer...

Sanjay Purushottam Agrawal and anr. Vs. Nirmaladevi Shantilal Ruparel ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(2)ALLMR749; 2004(5)BomCR781; 2004(3)MhLj363

A.S. Oka, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners.2. The petitioners are the original defendants in a suit filed by respondents Nos. 1 to 20 against the petitioners and respondent No. 21. By order dated 6th December, 2003, the learned trial Judge rejected the plaint by exercising powers under Order VII, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code').2-A. The original plaintiffs preferred an appeal for challenging the order rejecting the plaint. In the said appeal an application was made by the original plaintiffs/appellants for grant of temporary injunction. An objection was raised on behalf of the present petitioners to the maintainability of the said interim application on the ground that as a consequence of rejection of the plaint, the plaint did not exist and therefore, there was no question of entertaining an application for temporary injunction. By the impugned Judgment and Order the learned 5th Ad hoc Addl. District Judge, Akola, over...

isarar Ahmed Fateh Mohamed Ansari Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: I(2005)DMC327

P.V. Kakade, J. 1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 9th July, 1999 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities on Women) and Additional Sessions Judge, Thane in Sessions Case No. 232 of 1997, wherein the appellant was convicted for commission of offence punishable under Sections 302, 304B and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. He was sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 100/- in default to undergo R.I. for one month on first count and again sentenced to suffer life imprisonment for second count but no separate sentence was passed for offence under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. The facts giving rise to the present case, in short, are thus-3. The accused was married to one Rumana, who was the daughter of P.W. 2 Ruksana and step-daughter of P.W. 4 Alamgir, about three months before 2.2.1997. The spouses were co-habiting together in the house of the accused at H...

Jankibai Laxman Dhoke and ors. Vs. Ramesh Laxmanrao Uike and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: III(2004)ACC449; 2005ACJ2133; 2004(3)ALLMR437; 2004(4)BomCR763

S.T. Kharche, J.1. The legal representatives of deceased Laxman have filed this appeal being aggrieved by the common award dated 10.12.1993 passed under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short 'the Act') by the Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Yavatmal, in Claim Petition No. 7 of 1989 and other claim petitions, exonerating truck owner, respondent No. 2 and insurance company, respondent No. 3 from the liability to pay compensation.2. Brief facts are as under:The accident occurred on 13.12.1988 at about 3 p.m. on Kalamb-Yavatmal Road. On that day, deceased Laxman along with his goats, she-goats and hens was travelling in the truck bearing registration No. MTV 3512. The truck was being driven by respondent No. 1 in a rash and negligent manner. When the truck reached near the spot of accident, driver of the truck lost control of the driving and the truck had gone on the wrong side of the road and dashed against a tree. Consequently, Laxman and others sustained grie...

NavIn J. Surti Vs. Modi Rubber Limited and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(2)ALLMR358; (2004)106BOMLR314

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Perused the records.2. The grievance of the petitioner relates to the refusal by the Labour Court and the Industrial Court below to order payment of entire back wages inspite of the fact that the termination of service of the petitioner was found to be illegal and he was directed to be reinstated with continuity in service.3. Few facts relevant for the decision are that the petitioner was employed with the respondent No. 1. His services were terminated by an order dated 16th September, 1993, consequent to which, the petitioner filed complaint under Item Nos. l(b) and (f) of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, hereinafter called as 'the said Act', and the Labour Court by an order dated 29th November, 1999, while holding the termination of service to be illegal, directed the petitioner to be reinstated with continuity in service and further pa...

Kobe Steels Pvt. Ltd., Shri Deepak Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellants are not present, nor represented despite notice. We have examined the records and heard the Ld. JC.DR. After carefully considering the grounds of these appeals and the submissions made by Ld. JCDR, we are of the view that these appeals need to be finally disposed of at this stage. Accordingly, we allow the application and take up the appeals for disposal.2. These appeals are against the orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissing the appeals before him, on the sole ground of non-compliance with Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, without looking into the merits of the case. When these parties filed appeals with the Commissioner (Appeals), they had also prayed for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty amounts under Section 35F ibid, duties in respect of Kobe Steels Pvt Ltd. and M/s. Fleet weld India Ltd., and a penalty in respect of Shri D.S. Patel. In an interim order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), he directed M/s. Kobe Steels Pvt Ltd., to pr...