Mumbai Court February 2004 Judgments

State of Maharashtra Vs. Official Liquidator of Reliance Heat Transfer ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2004]120CompCas648(Bom); (2004)2CompLJ317(Bom); [2004]53SCL158(Bom)

A.M. Khanwilkar, J. 1. All these applications can be disposed of by common judgment, as it involve similar questions. Therefore, I propose to dispose of the same together by this common judgment.2. The respondent-company in each of these applications, has been directed to be wound up in terms of the order passed by the company court in each of the above numbered company petitions. The official liquidator has also been appointed in respect of the assets of each of these companies in liquidation. All the company applications, except Company Application No. 264 of 2003, have been filed by the State of Maharashtra, whereas Company Application No. 264 of 2003 has been taken out by the State of Karnataka. In Company Applications Nos. 312 of 2001, 347 of 2001, 447 of 2001, 493 of 2002 and 600 of 2002, the State of Maharashtra, the applicant therein, is claiming recovery of dues, which were receivable from the company in liquidation under the provisions of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, and t...

Murlidhar S/O Sahajram Sadhawani Vs. Resident Deputy Collector and anr ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(3)ALLMR867; 2004(4)BomCR725; 2004(3)MhLj378

A.S. Oka, J. 1. In both the petitions on 3rd July, 2003 notice for final disposal was issued. Accordingly both the petitions were extensively heard on 13th February, 2004 and the same were adjourned till today for Judgment.2. The facts of the case involved in both the petitions are more or less identical and therefore, both the petitions can be conveniently disposed of by a common Judgment and Order. Since the facts in both the cases are identical, for the sake of convenience, reference has been made to the facts of the case in Writ Petition No. 1971 of 2003.3. The petitioner is a tenant of the respondent No. 2 in respect of a shop premises at Karanja. The respondent No. 2 filed an application against the petitioner before the Rent Controller, Mangrulpir seeking permission to terminate the tenancy of the petitioner on the grounds set out in the said Application. By Judgment and Order dated 15th July, 2002 the said Application was rejected. It is the case of the petitioner that responde...

Abdul Saleem Siddiqui S/O Abdul Rahim Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(3)ALLMR487; [2005(104)FLR3]; 2004(3)MhLj450

A.P. Deshpande, J. 1. The writ petitioner in Writ Petition No. 4778/2003, so also, respondent Nos. 4 and 5 are in the employment of the Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad. The petitioners, so also, the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 came to be appointed in the post of 'Assistant to Junior Engineer' in the year 1990. In the year 1990, in all 28 persons were selected for being appointed in the post of 'Assistant to Junior Engineer', under order dated 1-3-1990. Under the said order dated 1-3-1990, 28 candidates were issued appointment orders and they were directed to resume the duties within a period of 7 days. Out of the said 28 candidates, only 18 persons joined the service and the said appointments were under 'Jawahar Rojgar Yojana'.By passage of time, the posts under 'Jawahar Rojgar Yojana, came to be abolished by the Government as the said scheme was wound up, consequent upon stoppage of release of grants by the Central Government. In the year 1999, the Government took a decision to absorb, such of...

Shashikant Shankar Patne Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: II(2004)DMC84

P.V. Kakade, J.1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 10.1.2000 passed by the Sessions Judge, Satara in Sessions Case No. 134 of 1999 wherein the appellant was convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 of the I.P.C. and was sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to undergo R.I. for three months.2. The facts giving rise to the present case, in brief, are thus--The accused is the resident of Karad. He had married to one Malan who died because of burn injuries previously, therefore, he solemnized his second marriage with deceased Sanjivani. He was living with his children and wife. He always used to quarrel with her after drinking liquor. On the date of the incident i.e., on 18.4.1999 he was in drunken condition and picked up quarrel with his wife at 5.00 p.m. At that time, daughter Rupali (P.W. 2) was playing outside the house. She was sent to call her maternal uncle Shiva (P.W. 3). He arrived at t...

Ranjitsing Brahmajeetsing Sharma and Etc. Vs. the State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004CriLJ3743

V.G. Palshikar, J.1. These three petitions raise identical questions of law and therefore by consent of parties, are heard together and will be decided together by this common order.2. Criminal Writ Petition No. 3 of 2004 has been filed by Shri Ranjitsing Sharma who retired as Commissioner of Police, Bombay. He has challenged by this petition the investigation and the FIR by which an offence under Section 3(2) and 3(5) of the MCOCA is registered against him by the police.3. Criminal Writ Petition No. 38 of 2004 is filed by Shri Anil Gote, a sitting M. L. A. of the Maharashtra Legislature, challenging the investigation and the FIR by which provisions of MCOCA were applied to him. He has therefore challenged the entire proceedings including the FIR and has contended like Shri Ranjeet Sharma that the application of these sections is improper, illegal and therefore void.4. The third petition being Cri W. P. No. 170 of 2004 is filed by Shri P. B. Sawant who is prosecuted along with two othe...

Reena Afonso Vs. State of Goa and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(3)SLJ112(Bombay)

P.V. Hardas, J.1. Ordinarily, a petition assailing the judgment of the Tribunal ought be placed for hearing before a learned Single Judge but in view of the prayer Clause (a) seeking for issuance of a writ of mandamus, the petition is taken up by the learned Division Bench for hearing.2. Rule. By consent of parties made returnable forthwith.3. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prays for the issuance of writ of certiorari questioning the correctness of the judgment dated 18th August, 2003, (SIC) by the Administrative Tribunal, Panaji, Goa, in Education Appeal No. 50/2003 (SIC) prays for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner as a regular teacher Grade I in English (General Stream). The petitioner came to (SIC)appointed in the year 1987 in the Vidya Vikas Mandals, Higher Secondary School (SIC)tially on lecture basis. Thereafter, the petitioner came to be appointed as a Part Time (SIC)acher in General Stream (Vocation...

Hirabai Ramdas Vyavahare and anr. Vs. State

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: II(2004)DMC724

P.B. Gaikwad, J.1. Original Accused Nos. 2 and 3, viz. Hirabai Ramdas Vyavahare and Sanjay Ramdas Vyavahare being dissatisfied with the order of conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik dated 29th March, 1993 convicting the appellants - Original Accused Nos. 2 and 3 for the offence punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and directing them to suffer R.I. for three years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default R.I. for three months, filed the present appeal.2. The facts in nutshell leading to the present appeal are that the deceased Ujwala was the daughter of P.W. 1 Ratan and P.W. 9 Indubai. Marriage of Ujwala was performed with Rajendra on 23.2.1989. After marriage of Ujwala she came to reside with her husband Rajendra who was residing along with his father Ramdas, mother Hirabai, sisters Lata and Anita and brother Sanjay at Shramik Nagar Colony, Nasik i.e., Deolaligaon, Taluka and District Nashik. It is alleged that on ...

The Commissioner of Central Vs. Flameproof Equipments Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(168)ELT329Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This is a Revenue appeal directed against the order-in-appeal whereunder the respondents' appeal against the order-in-original was allowed. In the order-in-original, duty of Rs. 55,370/- was confirmed against the respondents along with imposition of penalty of equivalent amount. Besides, a penalty of Rs. 30,000/- was also imposed on the company and Rs. 25,000/- on the Managing Director.2. The facts in brief are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of electrical machines and apparatus, such as flame proof/weather proof/fire safely/dust proof equipments. They cleared the said goods in question under delivery challans without payment of Central Excise duty and without accounting the same in RG-1 register.The respondent's defence was that, the said goods were the replacement of damaged goods and hence they did not account them in RG-1 register.This defence was not accepted by the original authority though the Commissioner (Appeals) accepted the version holding that, the ...

The Commissioner of Central Vs. Vip Industries Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This is an appeal from the Revenue against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) disallowed the appeal filed by the Revenue against the order-in-original, wherein the demand of Rs. 2,45,317/- raised against the respondents was dropped.The dispute relates to the reversal of modvat credit taken in respect of certain chemicals part of which were used in making certain components on job work basis and supplied to the principal manufacturer viz., M/s. Mattel Toys Ltd., in terms of Rule 57F (3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Assistant Commissioner-in-charge considered the issue and held that, the Rule 57CC, under which reversal of credit amounting to 8% of the price of the toys components, cleared from the respondents premises, is not required since the said Rule talks about the final products, which are chargeable to duty and those final products which are not chargeable to duty, being manufactured by the same manufacturer. The adjudicating a...

Chandan Steel Ltd. and Shri Dilip Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellant M/s. Chandan Steel Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as the Appellants) are engaged in the manufacture of Stainless Steel Billets falling under Chapter Heading No. 72.18 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and hold Central Excise Registration for the same. On 20.6.97, the Officers of Central Excise H.P.I.U.-III Surat visited their factory and conducted search. The Officers took the stock of raw materials and found that the same is tallying with the RG-23A, Part-1 Register. During the stock taking of finished goods a shortage of 76.424 M.T. Billers was noticed as recorded in the Panchanama drawn on 20.6.97. The Officers seized certain other records including six delivery challans allegedly prepared at the directions of one of the Directors of the Appellants, The Statement of Shri Dilip Chunnilal Chandan, Director of the Appellants was recorded on 20.6.97. The Appellants also debited the Central Excise duty amounting to Rs.2,29,272/- vide RG-23-A Part-11 Entry No. 424/ 20.6...