Mumbai Court April 2004 Judgments

State of Maharashtra Vs. Ramchandra Keshav Bhala

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(3)MhLj863

A.S. Aguiar, J.1. This appeal arises from the Judgment and Order dated 16th April, 2001 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 14th Court, Girgaon, Mumbai, in Case No. 15/P/1999 (4/I&R;/97) acquitting the accused of the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468 and 471 read with Sections 419 and 420, Indian Penal Code.2. The said Judgment and Order is inter alia impugned on the ground that the lower Court failed to appreciate that the accused by putting the name and signature of PW 3 Jamnadas Keshavdas Bhala and obtaining the bona fide certificate from the School Authorities, had impersonated himself as Jamnadas Keshavdas Bhala and obtained his bona fide certificate. It is submitted that the act of the accused is dishonest and fraudulent and that had the accused mentioned his name in the application, the school authorities would have refused to give him the bona fide certificates.3. The brief facts of the case are that the accused who is the uncle of the complainant and brother of th...

Sadashiv Chander Bhamgare Vs. Eknath Pandharinath Nangude

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2004Bom378; 2004(4)ALLMR380; 2004(4)BomCR564; 2004(4)CTC465; 2004(3)MhLj1131

D.K. Deshmukh, J.1. The Hon'ble the Chief Justice has constituted this Bench for consideration and decision of the following point.'Whether a suit simplicitor for injunction which is filed seeking protection under Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act is maintainable'.2. The facts giving rise to the reference are, one Eknath Pandharinath Nangude, present respondent, filed a civil suit seeking a decree of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant, present Appellant, from disturbing the possession of the plaintiff of two acres of land out of Gat No. 102 situated at village Gorhe Khurd, Taluka; Haveli, District; Pune. The case of the plaintiff is that on 20-2-1975 an agreement of sale was entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant for sale of two acres of land from Gat No. 102 situated at village Gorhe Khurd, Taluka; Haveli, District; Pune (hereinafter referred to as the 'suit land') for consideration of Rs. 9,000/-. On the date of the agreement an amount of Rs. 5000...

Mahesh Shivaji Dighe and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(3)ALLMR260; 2004(4)MhLj614

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard.Perused the records.2. In both these petitions common questions of law and facts arise and, therefore, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.In both these petitions, the petitioners challenge the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer in the land acquisition proceedings, being contrary to the mandate of Section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter called as 'the said Act'), inasmuch as that, the award was not passed within a period of two years, from the date of last declaration of the notification under Section 6 of the said Act.3. Few facts relevant for the decision are that, the respondent sought to acquire land for the purpose of Resettlement of Project Affected persons of Upper Pravara (Nilbande) Project, Taluka Akole, District Ahmednagar, by issuing notification under Section 4 of the said Act on 31st of October, 1992, and the same included the land to the extent of 81 Rule from Gat No. 173 o...

Carona Limited and anr. Vs. Arunchandra S/O Hiralal Kapadia

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(1)MhLj705

P.S. Brahme, J.1. Hear Shri R. R. Mantri, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri P. M. Shaha, learned senior counsel holding for Shri S. V. Gangapurwala and Shri M. N. Nawandar, learned counsel for the respondent.2. Perused the Judgments of both the Courts below and also the material produced by the parties.3. This revision application arises out of the proceedings initiated by the respondent/landlord before Rent Controller, Aurangabad for seeking possession of shop premises admittedly let out to petitioners as tenant under the Hyderabad Houses (Rent, Eviction and Lease) Control Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to for brevity's sake as 'Hyderabad Rent Act').4. The respondent had filed an application which was registered as case No. 98/MAG/ROCR/56 on 15th May, 1998 against the petitioner/tenant under the Hyderabad Rent Act for the possession of shop premises on the ground of default in payment of rent and also for requirement of the premises reasonably and bona fide by the responde...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Balkrishna Synthetics Siyaram

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

2. The respondent is a processor of manmade fabrics falling under Chapter 54 and 55 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. He clears nearly 65% of his production on job work basis to M/s. Siyaram Silk Mills Ltd. He holds shares (177503 nos.) in M/s. Siyaram Silk Mills Ltd.. The latter holds shaves in the former as well. In addition M/s. Siyaram Silk Mills Ltd. holds shares in M/s. Balkrishna Synthetics of which the respondent is a division. Not to be undone, M/s. Balkrishna Synthetics also holds shares in M/s. Siyaram Silk Mills Ltd. In addition, the respondent company and M/s. Siyaram Silk Mills Ltd. have the same chairman or some directors are common. The department contends that these companies are related persons and so the price at which the goods are sold by the respondent to M/s. Siyaram Silk Mills Ltd. is not at arms length. The department proposes to adopt the price at which M/s.Siyaram Silk Mills Ltd. sells the goods to its customers as assessable value in terms of proviso (iii) ...

Commissioner of Customs (import) Vs. Shashi Daswani, Kiran Daswani and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(170)ELT376Tri(Mum.)bai

1. In the above appeals the Revenue challenges the order of the Commissioner of Customs who has dropped the proceedings initiated against the Respondents herein under show cause notice dated 16/02/1995.3. The case of the department is that M/s. Chris Metal Holdings exported cheaper quality mosquito nets made out of re-cycled HDPE and over-invoiced the export with the ulterior motive of obtaining value based advance licence so as to enable them to import huge quantity of HDPE by duty free clearance under the DEEC scheme. The goods in question are HDPE woven fabrics imported under bill of entry dated 28/04/1994 which had already been exported by M/s. Chris Metal Holdings to Nigeria under shipping bill of August, 1993. This allegation is clearly unsustainable as the export goods were not prohibited goods and no DEEC licence was obtained because the respondents did not pursue their licence application with the DGFT as the exported goods were re-imported to India and the same was intimated...

Ramji International Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(95)ECC631

1. The appellants, in the course of their business, imported consignments of 76.770 MT (declared weight) of US origin Electrolytic Tin Plate Prime bright finish soft tempered, as declared, on a unit price of US$ 510 per MT and another consignment of 76.720 MT (declared weight) of identically declared goods at the same price. The goods were examined and it was reported vide Examination Report GDL.1253 dated 23.7.2003 that sheets therein were found packed with metal strap without any packing and sheets were rusted and were having rolling defects and an excess quantity of weight amounting to 11.212 MT was found, vide Examination Report GDL.1253 dated 23.7.2003 in other case, it was found that the goods were in coil form, newly packed, in PP woven fabrics, on opening the coils were found to be totally rusted and have rolling defects of visible nature and the weight was found to be excess than the declared weight by 14.411 MT.2. The importers waived the Show Cause Notice and were heard on ...

Commissioner of Customs Vs. BipIn K. Mehta

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. A case was booked for the import consignment of fabrics which arrived at Air Cargo Complex, Sahar, Mumbai. M/s Bipinchandra Kantilal Mehta, CHA, filed Bill of Entry No. 2614 dated 16.4.2001 for the clearance of the said fabrics by describing them as "Synthetic Pile Fabrics" 100% knitted fabric under CTH 6002.43. On examination, it was revealed that the goods were actually woven pile fabrics, and not 100% knitted fabric, as declared in the Bill of Entry. The investigation conducted and from the statement of Mr. Manoj Ved, an employee of the CHA firm, it was found and admitted that though the import documents, such as invoice, airway bill etc shoved description of the goods as 'Synthetic File Fabrics' the same had been mentioned by him as '100% knitted fabrics' and thus the description of the goods on the Bill of Entry was manipulated by him i.e. the Employee, in order to enable the importers to save Customs duty. The proprietor of the CHA firm confirmed, in his statement, and admitt...

Taiba Quareshi and ors. Vs. Mrs. Marina Sequeria Lourdes

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(3)MhLj917

V.C. Daga, J.1. This petition is filed at the instance of the obstructionists, who have obstructed execution of eviction decree passed by the Judge, Small Causes Court, Mumbai, in RAE Suit No. 577/1303 of 1992, in favour of respondent No. 1, Landlady and against original defendant Nos. 1 to 3, the tenants (respondent Nos. 2, 4 and 5 herein) on the ground that landlady required house for her own of bona fide occupation. Parties to the petition are referred to as per their original status for the sake of brevity.The Facts :The facts giving rise to the present petition in nutshell are as under :2. The petitioners are occupants of adjoining flat No. 8 in a building known as 'Ragie Annexe', M.M. Chotani Road, Mahim, Mumbai 400 016, whereas dispute relates to flat No. 7 located in the same building.3. The original tenant-Mrs. Una C. Saldanha along with Anthony Saldanha and Rev. Fr.Chrys Saldanha, the original defendants in the suit were tenants of one Mr. Marine Sequeria. Mrs. Marine Sequeri...

Hamaja MohiddIn Kutty Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(3)MhLj939

V.K. Tahilramani, J.1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant and learned A.P.P. for the State.2. The applicant has preferred this application for bail in C. R. No. 19 of 2003 registered at Anti-Narcotic Cell Mumbai. The said case is Special Case No. 58 of 2003 which is pending before the learned Special Judge under the N.D.P.S. Act.3. The present application is being pressed under Section 167(2) of Criminal Procedure Code as well as on the merits of the case. In respect of the prayer for bail under Section 167(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, few dates would be relevant:On 11th June, 2003 the applicant was arrested. On 12th June, 2003 the applicant was produced before the Special Judge for the first time and he was remanded to custody. On 11th August, 2003 i.e. on 61st day, the charge sheet came to be filed. On 6th August, 2003 an application for bail on merits was preferred. On 30th August, 2003 the application for bail was rejected. On 18th September, 2003 an application for bai...