Mumbai Court July 2004 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Alok Traders Vs. Corporation for the City of Nagpur
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)ALLMR713; 2005(1)BomCR270; 2004(4)MhLj634
D.D. Sinha, J.1. Heard Shri Samudra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Kaptan, learned counsel for the respondent.2. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the checking squad of Octroi Department found that though there were in all 169 cartons in the Matador, inclusive of 28 cartons of Binny's dry gin which were not accounted for by the importer firm in the declaration. The original transit pass concerned, issued by the Excise Department, did not find any mention of these 28 cartons though these passes were subsequently corrected by the Excise Department by adding therein these 28 cartons, after seizure of the goods by the Octroi department. It is submitted that the checking squad of the Octroi department thereafter found that the declaration about the goods, tendered on behalf of the firm, was false and therefore, initiated action for recovery of penal Octroi duty from the firm.3. The Octroi Superintendent vide Order dated 21-5-1990 held that the petitioner commi...
Anandrao S/O Budha Gaidhane and ors. Vs. Maharashtra State Electricity ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-2004
Reported in: I(2005)ACC773; 2004(4)ALLMR709; 2005(1)BomCR294; 2004(4)MhLj539
D.D. Sinha, J.1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith and heard by consent of the parties.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioners states that one Krushna s/o Anandrao Gaidhane, who was son of petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 and brother of petitioner Nos. 3 and. 4, was doing construction work on daily wages and he came in contact with live electric wire at Rajiv Gandhi Square, Takiya Ward, Bhandara and died due to electrocution. At that time, the age of the deceased, was 22 years. The incident in question took place on 12-8-1999 and the deceased died on 14-8-1999 in the hospital.3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that in view of the Circular dated 28-1-993 issued, by the Respondent-Board, the petitioners are entitled to receive an amount of Rs. 60,000/- as compensation for the death of their son and brother from the respondent-Board. It is further contended that the petitioners have made a representation to the respondent-Board, for grant of compensation to the tune of Rs. 60,00...
Vishnu S/O Domaji Chaware Vs. Collector and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)ALLMR864; 2005(1)BomCR258; 2004(4)MhLj641
D.D. Sinha, J.1. Heard Shri Deshmukh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mrs. Dangre, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents.2. Shri Deshmukh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, states that the petitioner was selected from the open category and appointed as Talathi on 13-8-1971 at Dahegaon. On 6-7-1981 petitioner obtained caste certificate from Tahsildar, Nandura to the effect that petitioner belongs to 'Mahadeo Koli' (Scheduled Tribe). It is submitted that on the basis of the said certificate, petitioner applied to the respondent No. 2 for change of entry in the service book. On 25-9-1985, Tahsildar, Nandura conducted enquiry and after necessary enquiry, found that petitioner belongs to 'Mahadeo Koli' (Scheduled Tribe).3. Learned Counsel Shri Deshmukh further submits that another enquiry was conducted in respect of caste certificate of the petitioner by Sub-Divisional Officer, Malkapur and after necessary enquiry, it was again found that petitioner belongs to '...
Dnyandeo Karbhari Nagare Vs. Gitaram Shankar Wakchaure and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-2004
Reported in: I(2005)ACC830; 2005ACJ374; 2004(4)ALLMR710; 2004(4)MhLj644
N.V. Dabholkar, J.1. All four appeals challenge the decisions of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmednagar, which were claims arising out of one and the same accident.2. On 8-5-1986, at about 09.15 a.m., deceased Madhav and his wife Parvatabai were going on motorcycle. It is said that they were travelling from east towards west and while they were about to cross a square, a goods truck No. MHF-6541, which was travelling from north to south, knocked down the motorcycle in the square. It was the claim of all the claimants that the truck driver drove the truck in total disregard of travelling of motorcycle and signal given by motorcycle driver, i.e. deceased Madhav. It is said that, Madhav and his wife died on the spot and the motorcycle suffered extensive damages.3. Four Appeals are the appeals against decisions in Motor Accident Claim Petition (MACP) Nos. 187 of 1986, 179 of 1986, 180 of 1986 and 178 of 1986 respectively.MACP No. 187 (First Appeal No. 356 of 1991) was filed, by Dnyande...
Kamalsingh S/O Matasingh Shiv Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MhLj218
P.S. Brahme, J.1. Heard Mr. Lubesh Meshram, Advocate, for appellant and Mr. Y. B. Mandpe, A. P. P. for State-respondent.In this appeal the appellant has challenged his conviction and sentence for offence under Section 3 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act and under Section 128 read with Section 177 of the Motor Vehicles Act by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Sessions Trial No. 516/1999 on 24-7-2003 by sentencing him to R.I. for five years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo R. I. for one month and fine of Rs. 50/- in default S.I. for 2 days respectively.2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 10-3-1999, the appellant along with his associates at about 11.00 p.m. at Motibag Road proceeded on their vehicle for committing dacoity by means of weapons and on suspicion the police staff caught them on the spot with fire arms and hence on the basis of complaint under Section 399 read with Section 3 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act the charge sheet was filed again...
Vijay Kamalakant Patkar Vs. State Bank of India and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)ALLMR576; 2005(1)BomCR346
Rebello F.I., J.1. It is not necessary for us to set out in detail the pleadings as set out in the petition and the reply. It will be sufficient to set out only those facts which are necessary to dispose of the petition considering the reliefs prayed for in the petition.2. The petitioner joined the services of the respondent No. 1 as a Clerk on 1st May, 1957. On 24th August, 1984 the respondent No. 1 granted the petitioner extension of service for a period of 5 years with effect from 1st May, 1984, upon the petitioner completing the age of 50 years. It is the case of the petitioner that he gave his consent and accepted the extension granted. On 5th February, 1985 the respondent No. 1 placed the petitioner under suspension on alleged ground of irregularity. A charge-sheet was thereafter issued on 4th July, 1986. Thereafter there are various intervening circumstances which need not be adverted to, including various proceedings filed before this Court and the interim reliefs passed therei...
United Labour Union Vs. Air India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-2004
Reported in: 2004(6)BomCR121; [2004(104)FLR1014]; (2005)ILLJ514Bom; 2005(1)MhLj475
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. Heard forthwith.2. The petitioner Union, seeking to represent, the workers working in the canteen known as Dining Facilities Center at Air India Building, Nariman Point, have challenged the order of the Appropriate Government i.e. Central Government dated 5th June, 2003 rejecting their claim for reference in terms of the Charter of Demands served by them on respondent No. 1 management.3. A few facts may be set out as they will be essential for the purpose of deciding the controversy. The workmen earlier represented by Bharatiya Kamgar Sena had filed a Writ Petition before this Court bearing No. 96 of 1992 wherein they had sought the following reliefs :-(1) Direction to Air India to treat the workmen employed in the Dining Facilities Center as their own workmen;(2) Direction to pay the workmen the wages paid to the lowest category of employees in Air India. When the petition came up for hearing a learned Division Bench of this Court by order dated 11th February,...
Prakash Mohanlal Chopda Vs. Yalaji Rahuji Ghule and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MhLj759
N.V. Dabholkar, J.1. These three appeals arise out of a common accident. Three appeals are preferred as against decisions in three claim petitions filed by the claimants before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Ahmednagar i.e., M.A.C.T. Nos. 105/86, 152/86 and 121/86. All three appeals can be heard and disposed of together because common issue is raised by the appellant, who is owner of one of the vehicles, involved in the accident, in all three appeals.2. The accident in question took place on 6th of May, 1986 at about 1.00 p.m. near mile stone No. 131, about 6 Kms. from Rahuri towards Ahmednagar side on Manmad - Ahmednagar road. Jeep No. MHV 8110 is the vehicle owned by present appellant and which was not insured at the material time. It was being driven by respondent Parshuram Todmal at the material time. The other vehicle involved in the accident was goods truck No. MJF 6634 owned by respondent Gurudayalsingh and driven by deceased respondent Shaikh Muhammad at the material time. The ...
Johnson and Johnson Employees' Union and Ors. Vs. Johnson and Johnson ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-2004
Reported in: 2004(6)BomCR109; (2005)ILLJ746Bom
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Learned counsel for the Respondents waive service. By consent taken up for hearing and final disposal.2. On August 16, 1999, the Petitioners instituted a complaint before the Industrial Court under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, complaining of unfair labour practices under Item 5 of Schedule II and Items 9 and 10 of Schedule IV. The first Petitioner is a registered Trade Union which claims to have a membership of all the 142 workmen engaged by the First Respondent in its Permacel Division at Andheri. The Union had entered into seven settlements with the employer since 1981, the last of them on July 21, 1999. On August 13, 1999, a Press Note appeared in the daily edition of the Economic Times stating that the First Respondent had sold and transferred its Permacel Division at Andheri to a Company forming part of the Premchand Group headed by Mr. Susheel Premc...
Bhima S.S.K. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-13-2004
Reported in: (2004)(171)ELT317Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The stay application is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereunder the appeal of the appellants against the order-in-original passed by the Assistant Commissioner was rejected. Vide the order of the Assistant Collector, the appellants were directed to pay an amount of Rs. 4,70,707/- towards service tax liability under Section 68 of the Finance Act, 1994.3. The appellants pray that they have strong prima facie case on merits to claim that the said service tax is not leviable. Service tax of Rs. 4,70,707/- was sought to be recovered from the appellants for the period from 16-7-1997 to 1-6-1998, being the availer of the services of the goods transport operators. The main plea of the appellants to oppose the tax is based on the decision of the Tribunal reported in 2004 (165) E.L.T. 161 (Tri. - Del.) in the case of L.H. Sugar Factories Ltd. v. C.C.E., Meerut-II, in which it has been held that even the amended Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994, whereunde...
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »