Mumbai Court August 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.
Asgar Yusuf Mukadam and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and the Superint ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-02-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ4312
R.M.S. Khandeparker, J.1. Heard the leaned advocate for the petitioners and the learned APP for State. Perused the records.2. The petitioners challenge the vires of Sections 31 and 32, as amended, of the Prisons Act, 1894, hereinafter called as 'the said Act', being in violation of the provisions of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and for further direction against implementation of those provisions of law.3. Few facts relevant for the decision are that, at the relevant time, the petitioners were lodged in Bombay Central Prison at Arthur Road, as under-trial prisoners in Bomb Blast Cases No. 1 of 1993. They were detained for a period exceeding seven years at the time of the filing of the petition. Section 31 of the said Act, which dealt with the provisions relating to the availability of certain facilities regarding food, clothing, bedding and other necessaries to the under-trial prisoners and civil prisoners as well as Section 32 which dealt with restriction on transfer...
Kulsum Bai Wd/O Zahid HussaIn and ors. Vs. Jagdish S/O Sunder Singh an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-02-2004
Reported in: III(2005)ACC114; 2005(2)ALLMR234; 2005(1)MhLj150
Anoop V. Mohta, J.1. Heard. This appeal has been preferred by the original petitioners/appellants herein, and challenged the Judgment and Award dated 21st September, 1995, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur (for short 'the Tribunal'), in Claim Petition No. 492/1994, whereby the respondents were jointly and severally directed to make payment of compensation of Rs. 1,75,000/- together with proportionate cost and interest @ 12% from the date of petition i.e. 7th January, 1992. However, being dissatisfied with the same, the appellants have preferred this appeal for enhancement of the compensation.2. That on 8th August, 1991 the deceased Zahid Hussain, while travelling in Mini Truck No. MWZ 5268 from Amravati to Nagpur met with an accident with another Truck bearing No. MP 23.3158, belonging to the respondent No. 1, and insured with the respondent No. 2. Therefore, an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act'), in question came to b...
Engineering Mazdoor Sabha Vs. Additional Commissioner of Labour and or ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-02-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)BomCR669; (2005)IILLJ597Bom
Khanwilkar A.M., J.1. This writ petition takes exception to the decision of the Additional Commissioner of Labour, Mumbai and specified authority under Section 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act') dated 29th April, 2003 and 9th July, 2003 respectively. By order dated 29th April, 2003, the said authority partly allowed the application preferred by the respondent company for seeking permission to retrench 284 workmen out of 509 workmen of in its Borivli Unit only to the extent of 276 workmen on the conditions stated in the order. The correctness of that decision was put in issue by the petitioner union, as well as respondent No. 3 union, which are the two unions operating in the Borivli Unit of the respondent company by way of review as provided under Section 25-N(6) of the said Act. That review application came to be rejected by the second order dated 9th July, 2003. As mentioned earlier, the respondent company made application for permis...
Nagpur Gas and Domestic Appliance Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-02-2004
Reported in: [2005]139STC377(Bom)
K.J. Rohee, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents.2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the orders of the First Bench of the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal dated December 11, 1987 and the Second Bench of the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal dated December 30, 1989 and has prayed for a declaration regarding exemption from payment of sales tax.3. The petitioner is dealing in cooking gas, hot plates and its spare parts. The petitioner is required to purchase hot plates from outside Maharashtra State. The corresponding sales in the State of Maharashtra is taxed at 8 per cent by the Sales Tax Officer. At the time of assessment for the period :(a) From January 1, 1981 to December 31, 1981(b) From January 1, 1982 to December 31, 1982(c) From January 1, 1983 to October 25, 1983The Sales Tax Officer held that hot plates are liable to be taxed at 8 per cent. Subsequently, the petitioner found that the ho...
Devidas Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-02-2004
Reported in: I(2005)DMC861
S.B. Deshmukh, J. 1. The appellant faced trial for the offence punishable under Sections 498A and 306 of IPC.The prosecution version as unfolded during the trial is as under:The appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused' for short) was at the material time, working in the Archeological Department of the Govt. of India as Watchman. Sonabai is the first wife of the accused. Sonabai has two daughters and a son. The eldest son, Datta was about 14-15 years old and the second daughter Ashabai (P.W. 4) is about 8-9 years old. Sonabai was suffering from some ailment, which affected her legs. Therefore, Mangalabai, sister of Sonabai was given in marriage to the accused, 4-5 years before the incidence. The P.W. 1 Dadarao Ghule, P.W. 2 Dnyaneshwar Ghule are brothers of Sonabai as well as deceased Mangalabai. Mangalabai sustained 100% burn injuries and succumbed to it. The inquest Panchanama shows that the deceased sustained injuries on 16.8.1991. In the same incidence, P.W. 4 Ashabai, da...