Mumbai Court March 2004 Judgments

Shri Sadashiv Virtuji Petkar Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(4)ALLMR809; [2004(102)FLR450]; 2004(3)MhLj131

Rebello, J.1. The Petitioner by the present petition, impugns the order dated 3.3.1999 passed in Original Application No. 263 of 1993.2. The Petitioner had filed Original Application challenging the order dated 21.1.1991 by which Respondent Nos. 3 and 6 herein were promoted as Director of Education and the petitioner was denied promotion. The case of the Petitioner as argued before the Respondent Tribunal was that the adverse entries were never communicated to him and consequently his down grading by Respondent No. 4 herein was illegal. As the adverse entries were taken into consideration he was denied promotion. The second challenge was that Respondent No. 2 ought not to have been a member of the Establishment Board which considered the promotion in question as the Respondent No. 2 was the Reviewing officer for the annual confidential reports of the Respondent No. 6. Apart from that it was also contended that the constitution of the Board was also contrary to the provisions of the Gov...

Walmikrao Jayaram Kajale Vs. Uttam Buvaji Raut and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: III(2004)ACC489; 2004ACJ2009; 2004(2)MhLj1069

P.S. Brahme, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by appellant/original claimant against the order passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmednagar in Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 87 of 1983, dated 24th August, 1988 dismissing his application for compensation.2. The applicant on 12th October, 1983, filed the aforesaid application for compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the accident which took place on 4th May, 1983 at about 10.30 p.m. on Kopargaon Railway Station road, and he has claimed compensation of Rs. 25,000/- from respondents.3. Respondent No. 1 at the time of the accident, was riding motor cycle No. MTC-892 which was owned by respondent No. 3 had given the said motorcycle to respondent No. 2 who in turn handed it to respondent No. 1. It is admitted that the relevant time, the applicant was riding his motorcycle MXM-1874 which was insured with respondent No. 4 Insurance Company, while motorcycle belonging to respondent No. 3 was insured with Insurance Company...

Jainabi Yusuf Lambe and ors. Vs. Jainabi Allimiya Wagale and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2004Bom394; 2004(4)ALLMR248; 2004(3)MhLj619

P.V. Kakade, J.1. Both these appeals can be conveniently disposed of by this common judgment as they arise out of the same dispute and have been disposed by the lower Court toy common judgment.2. The subject matter of both these appeals is the impugned order dated 25.4.2000 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Ratnagiri, dismissing both appeals with costs.The only substantial question of law involved in these appeals, as framed by my learned predecessor, is regarding interpretation of document Exh.73 which is the agreement between the parties to determine whether the said document is the document creating tenancy or a mere licence.3. The facts involved in these appeals, in brief, are thus -- Respondent No. 1 Jainabi Allimiya Wagale (hereinafter referred to as 'the original plaintiff') owned and possessed Municipal House No. 1082 at Ratnagiri. The said house is called as 'Wagale Court'. The plaintiff was running a hotel business and business of lodging house in three rooms on the...

Nagnath Kaulwar and Sons Vs. Govindram Shyamsunder

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2004Bom271; 2004(4)ALLMR801; 2004(6)BomCR878

ORDERS.T. Kharche, J.1. By invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the appellant-original defendant has filed this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment dated 22-12-1989 passed by the Additional District Judge in Regular Civil Appeal No. 42/1988 whereby the appeal was allowed and judgment and decree passed by the trial Court on 14-1-1988 is set aside and the suit of the respondent-plaintiff is decreed with cost with further direction to the defendant to pay Rs. 11.969/- with interest @ Rs. 12% per annum from the date of the suit till realisation.2. Relevant facts are required to be stated as under :The respondent-plaintiff a registered partnership firm filed Regular Civil Suit No. 228 of 1980 against the appellant-defendant claiming damages and notice charges amounting to Rs. 11.969/- on the contentions that it is carrying on business in the name of M/s. Govindram Shyamsunder under registration No. 568 of 1960-61. The plaintiff-firm de...

New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Chand Bi Wd/O Sher Ali Alias Gasi ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: III(2005)ACC12; 2005ACJ751; 2004(4)MhLj879

S.T. Kharche, J. 1. By invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, this first appeal has been filed by M/s New India Assurance Company Ltd. Challenging the judgment and award passed by the Claim Tribunal underSection 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short the M. V. Act) directing the Insurance Company as well as the owner of the motor vehicle involved in the accident to pay jointly and severally the amount of Rs. 17,000/- to the applicants together with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of application till realisation.2. Relevant facts are required to be stated as under :The accident occurred on 25-1-1982. Sher Ali died as a result of an accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, i.e. truck bearing No. MHG 7622. This truck was hired by the deceased for carrying iron rods, sheeps and goats. He along with goods, was travelling in the truck which was scheduled for Nagpur. When the truck reached near Shahapur bridge, it tur...

Sanjay S/O Kewalchand Bhondekar Vs. Chairman, Maharashtra Small Scale ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(4)BomCR717; 2005(1)MhLj171

J.N. Patel, J.1. This petition is preferred seeking quashing and setting aside the impugned order of dismissal dated 28th May, 1997 passed by the respondent No. 2, with a direction to recover the amount of Rs. 17.37 lacs, from the petitioner and further as regards the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer, holding that the part of Charge Nos. 5 and 7 of the Charge Sheet dated 17th January, 1995 arc proved against the petitioner and also to quash and set aside the impugned appellate order dated 19th September, 1997 passed by the respondent No. 1, rejecting the appeal preferred by the petitioner against his order of dismissal.2. The petitioner who has Degree in Bachelor of Engineering (Mechanical), from Shivaji University, Kolhapur applied to the respondents for being appointed on the post of Manager. The petitioner was interviewed on 6th October, 1990, pursuant to which he came to be appointed as Manager by letter dated 3rd January, 1991. In response to the letter of appointment the ...

Nicholas Piramal Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The dispute in the instant appeal relates to denial of modvat credit of Rs. 32,320/-. The denial of credit was proposed through 2 show cause notices, which were dropped in adjudication. On revenue's appeal aganist the adjudication order the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the said adjudication order. The present appeal of the appellants challenges the impugned order-in-appeal. The dispute relates to the admissibility of credit taken by the appellants on the basis "Delivery Note" which is not a prescribed document for availing modvat credit.3. The appellants are pleading that besides manufacturing their own final products and clearing the same on payment of appropriate Central Excise duty, they were also manufacturing final products on behalf of M/s Rhone Poulenc (India) Limited (RPR). The appellants had taken credit on the basis of valid duty paying documents in respect of inputs to be used for the manufacture of final products on behalf of RPI as well as for their own production....

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Bhajrang Industries and ors.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(173)ELT304Tri(Mum.)bai

1. These eight appeals filed by the Revenue are being decided by this common order, as the issue involved is the same.2. The issue is imposition of penalties under Rule 173Q in cases where excisable goods have been found not entered in the RG1 register and the resultant confiscation thereof ordered under Rule 173Q which was set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals), as he found that there was no merits in confiscation and imposition of penalties in view of the settled law on the subject which are mentioned in the impugned order.He also found that the basic records such as bill book, receipt book, purchase register etc have been admitted by the adjudicating authority to have been found at the time of the search itself and were expressly placed under seizure and the fact that relaxation had been given to Small Scale Units not have been taken into consideration and maintenance of up to date records on day to day basis were required to be treated is nothing but procedure infraction for whic...

Spa Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The dispute in the present appeal relates to the classification of the appellant's product "Desent Toothpaste". the appellants have claimed the classification of the said product under Chapter 30 read with Exemption Notification No.48/77-CE dtd. 01/04/1977 on the ground that the same has therapeutic value to teeth and Gum such as control of plaque and Tartar and the same is also being manufactured under a licence granted by Food and Drug Administration, Aurangabad. One of the active ingredients of the product is "Strontium Chloride' which is useful and accepted as a drug for immediate relief of dentine highper sensitivity. Lot of evidence was also placed by the appellants before the authorities below in support of his claim of classification under Chapter 30.2. The Original Authority, however, did not accept the above claim and vide his order-in-Original approved the classification under Chapter 3306. On a appeal against the above order, appellants referred to the tribunal's decisi...

Britannia Industries Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appeal is directed against the impugned order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The issue relates to availment of modvat credit on goods cleared by the appellant's, Reay Road Mumbai Unit, the bone of contention being the fact that the invoices were not in the name of M/s. Britannia Industries Ltd., but in the name of M/s.Laxmi Enterprises. According to the department this omission was a contravention of Rule 57A and 57G of modvat rules and the invoices under which the said goods were cleared by Reay Road Unit were not valid duty paying document to avail the credit in the appellant's Bhandup unit.3. The appellants have raised prima facie objection to the demands issued under Rule 571 on the ground that with effect from 01/04/2000 the Rule 571 stood repealed without there being any saving clause. In this connection, I note that in terms of Section 38A of the Central Excise Act, the rights and obligation which accrued during the currency of the said rules stand saved...