Mumbai Court February 2004 Judgments

Savita Chemicals Ltd. and Shri Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The dispute in the present appeal relates to shortage of receipt of imported inputs in the factory of the appellants, when compared with the quantity indicated in the import documents vis-a-vis the quantity on receipt actually ascertained through weighment on the weigh bridge installed in the factory, certain quantitative differential i.e. short receipt of inputs was noticed. The lower authorities proceeded to demand duty in respect of duty payable on the quantities received short. Penalty of equivalent amount was also imposed under Rule 57 (ii) (4) read with Section 11AC and separate penalty was imposed on the manager.2. The instant two appeals, one from the company and the other one from the Deputy General Manager (works) directed against the orders of the lower authorities.3. Heard both sides. The appellants' plea is that the difference between the quantity manifested on the import documents and that which is actually received based on the weighments earned out on the weigh brid...

Laxman Namdeo Tambat and ors. Vs. Shri Jayant Anant Belsare

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(2)MhLj915

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Respondent waive service. By consent taken up for hearing and final disposal.2. In a suit for eviction instituted on the ground of a default in the payment of rent, the Additional District Judge, Kalyan by the impugned order dated 21st June 2003 allowed an appeal against the judgment of the Trial Court, decreeing the suit. The Additional District Judge has come to the conclusion that the judgment and decree of the Trial Court has to be set aside and that the suit must accordingly stand dismissed. The landlord is in appeal against the judgment of the appellate Court.3. The suit for eviction in the present case was instituted in respect of commercial property bearing House No. 54, also known as 'Yashwant Building' situated at Lane No. 36 at Kalyan. The Respondent is a tenant occupying one shop in the suit premises wherein he carries on the business of dealing in automobile spare parts. The agreement of tenancy was entered into between th...

Pratap Hanmant Pol and Hanwant Dyanoba Pol Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: II(2004)DMC108

Kakade, J.1. Both these appeals can be disposed of by this common judgment as they arise out of the judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli, in Sessions Case No. 58 of 1998. Originally, all the 5 accused persons were prosecuted for commission of the offence punishable under Section 498-A, Section 302 read with 34 and Section 201 read with 34 of the I.P.C. Accused Nos. 1 & 2 were found guilty of commission of the offence under Section 498-A, Section 302 read with Section 201 read with 34 of the I.P.C., whereas accused Nos. 3, 4 & 5 were acquitted of the charges under Section 302 and Section 201 read with 34 of the I.P.C. but were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of the I.P.C. Accused Nos. 1 & 2 were convicted and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 15,000/- each in default to suffer R.I. for one year for offence of murder, whereas they were sentenced to suffer R.I. for 5 years and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- each...

Barshi Education Society Vs. Shri Ashok Ganesh Kulkarni and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(5)BomCR772; [2005(104)FLR2]; 2004(3)MhLj587

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. In pursuance of the order of the Court dated 11th December 2003 issuing notice, the First Respondent has appeared. Service has been effected on the Second and Third Respondents and an affidavit of service has been filed. The Fourth Respondent, the State of Maharashtra is served and appeared on the previous occasion through the A.G.P.2. The First Respondent was appointed initially as an Assistant Teacher and thereafter since 1st November 1991 as a Headmaster in a primary school run and conducted by the Petitioner at Barshi. On 16th October 1998, the First Respondent tendered his resignation as Headmaster. The resignation, it is admitted, was submitted in person. The management accepted the resignation on 3rd November 1998. On 7th January 1999, the First Respondent instituted a Civil Suit contending that the resignation was not voluntary and prayed for reinstatement with back wages. The plaint came to be returned for presentation before the School Tribunal, having ...

Rajendra Narayan Mahajan Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: II(2004)DMC432; 2004(2)MhLj618

B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. The appellant was put on trial in Sessions Case No. 224/1998 before the learned 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 302 of the Indian Penal Code (the Code, for short) and by the judgment and order dated 17-8-1999, he came to be convicted for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Code, whereas, he has been acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Code. He has been sentenced to suffer RI for life with a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default, to suffer RI for seven days for the offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and he has been in custody from 12-5-1998, as has been noted by the court below.Being aggrieved by the said order of conviction and sentence, this appeal has been moved before us. By the order dated 18-2-2000, the prayer of the appellant for bail was rejected.2. The deceased Sarala d/o Makadu Koli (PW5), r/o village Utran was married to the appellant sometimes in...

Shri Brijlal M. Ahuja Vs. Bandra Trilok Co-op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd. and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(2)ALLMR678; 2004(4)BomCR120; (2004)106BOMLR264

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Perused the records. Rule. By consent, the rule is made returnable forthwith and taken up for hearing.2. Bare perusal of the orders passed by the lower authorities discloses that the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies by his order dated 8.1.2001 had allowed the application filed by the petitioner on the ground that he had become deemed member in respect of Shop Nos. 8, 9 and 10 in accordance with the provision of Section 22(2) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'. It is apparent that the Revisional Authority has interferred with the said order on totally extraneous grounds, without addressing itself to the said issue regarding deemed membership. The learned Advocate for the respondent No. 1 Society has stated that in terms of the provisions of law by which the Society is governed, membership is available only in relation to the flats while the garages a...

Munjani Brothers and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Heard both sides and considered the stay applications and it is found that: (a) 5 Bills of Entry filed by M/s Vijaybhav, M/s Deepali Exports and M/s Pushpak Impex for import of diamonds worth Rs. 5,68,09,916/-. Same were ordered to be confiscated, penalties were imposed on the proprietors and the proprietary concerns under Section 112 (a) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the grounds that the licences produced for the clearances of the subject goods were forged and the clearances were not required to be permitted and this attempt to clear such diamonds on these forged licences would call for confiscation of the said goods as clearance of diamonds were permissible only on valid transferred REP licences required to be produced. Since no such valid licences were produced, the goods were ordered to be confiscated and consequential penalties were imposed. (b) Since the goods have been confiscated and no redemption fine has been ordered and the goods are in the custody of the department and pr...