Mumbai Court November 2005 Judgments

Gini Silk Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty demand arises out of the order of Commissioner of Central Excise Thane-11 the applicant availed of the facility of payment of Central Excise duty under the Compounded Levy Scheme as provided under erstwhile Rule 96ZQ of Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Hot Air Stenter Independent Textile Processors Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1998 during the period 16-12-1998 to 28-02-2001. The Commissioner in the impugned order demanded Rs. 1,85,09,688/- (Rupees One Crore Eighty Five Lakhs Nine Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Eight only) under Section 11D (3) of the Central Excise Act, towards duty alleged to have been collected by the applicant from their customers but not deposited with the Government.During the material time the applicant was clearing the finished goods i.e. processed MMF under Compounded Levy Scheme. It was found that the applicant was collecting certain sums as service charges in addition to the processing charges. T...

Abdul Salam S/O Sheikh Rahim (Died) Through Lrs. Salma Begum W/O Abdul ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(2)ALLMR549; 2006(3)BomCR700; 2006(2)MhLj277

S.T. Kharche, J.1. By invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, this second appeal takes an exception to the judgment and decree dated 27-9-1991 passed by the learned Joint District Judge, Nagpur in Regular Civil Appeal No. 104 of 1985, whereby the appeal came to be dismissed and the judgment and decree passed by the learned 15th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division in Regular Civil Suit No. 1663 of 1982 has been confirmed by which the legal representatives of original defendant No. 1 have been directed to execute the sale deed of the suit house described in Schedule annexed to the plaint in favour of the plaintiff within one month from the date of that order with further direction to the plaintiff to deposit an amount of Rs. 25,000/- as consideration or value of the suit house in the Court within 25 days from the date of that order.2. On hearing the learned counsel for the respective parties, the following substantial question of law is fo...

Shipping Corporation of India Vs. Himatlal Sewai Solanki

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006ACJ2416; 2006(3)ALLMR123; [2006(109)FLR541]; 2006(2)MhLj333

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. Admit. Perused the pleadings, evidence and the proceedings with the assistance of Learned Counsel for the parties and the appeal is taken up for final disposal.2. The respondent was a Seaman, registered with the Seamen's Association and in a working span of 22 years rendered duty on diverse ships including those of the Shipping Corporation of India. The respondent was taken on board a vessel of the appellant, M.V. Major Thapa, on 16th May, 1996 under Articles of Agreement. As a seaman, the respondent was required to carry out work of a varied nature including painting, sweeping, cleaning and repairing in connection with the ship. On 21st November, 1996, the ship was at Mumbai Port and while on Board, the respondent suffered severe pain in the chest and informed the Master of the Ship, who sent him to a Doctor appointed by the appellant. He in turn referred the respondent to the Harkisondas Hospital. An ECG was taken and the respondent was admitted as an indoor pa...

Official Liquidator of John Galt Laboratories Ltd. (In Liquidation) Vs ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2006]133CompCas258(Bom); [2007]74SCL129(Bom)

B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This is application under Section 542 read with Section 543 of the Companies Act, 1956, for taking cognizance of misfeasance against three respondents namely R. B. Sangare, P. P. Joshi, S. N. Bapat in the matter of M/s. John Galt Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. (in liquidation). On August 29, 1989, this court ordered winding up and the present proceedings are filed by the official liquidator on August 17, 1994. This proceedings are filed on the basis of investigation report prepared by chartered accountant M/s. Salve and Company dated April 30, 1994, in which it is mentioned that the company named above was put to loss of Rs. 10,51,714.22 due in negligence and mismanagement of the ex-directors. According to the official liquidator amount of Rs. 4,25,591.03 is the value of stock not handed over to the official liquidator while the amount of Rs. 2,08,153.20 is due from sundry debtors as per the balance sheet as on December 31, 1996, and ex-directors failed and neglected t...

Chotelal Ramkaran Yadav Vs. Municipal Corporation for Gr. Mumbai

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(3)ALLMR261; 2006(1)MhLj873

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. These appeals arise out of a common judgment and order of the City Civil Court dated 1st March, 2005 in four suits, L.C. Suit Nos. 8083 and 8084 of 1995, 6040 of 1999 and S. C. Suit No. 2538 of 2003. All the plaintiffs in the aforesaid suits claim that they have acquired land bearing Survey No. 123, Hissa No. 1A under an agreement to sell dated 30th August 1968. The plaintiffs claim that they had purchased 10 gunthas of land along with the structure which was in existence thereon. On the basis of an apprehension that the structure would be demolished by the officials of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) and the Municipal Corporation, L.C. Suit Nos. 3928, 3929 and 3930 of 1991 were instituted before the City Civil Court seeking relief to the effect that the structure should not be demolished without due process of law. In Notice of Motion No. 3091 of 1991 in L.C. Suit No. 3930 of 1991, an injunction was sought in respect of a structure...

Neeta Gurudas Natekar Vs. Vaishali Falari and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(1)ALLMR292; 2006(1)BomCR529

Sinha D.D., J.1. Heard Mr. S. G. Dessai, the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, Mr. V. P. Thali, the learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 and Mr. S. S. Kantak, the learned Advocate General for the respondents No. 4 to 8. 2. The appeal from order is directed against the order dated 11th November, 2005 passed by the IInd Additional District Judge, Panaji, whereby the application for interim relief moved by the present appellant in Election Petition No. 1/2005 came to be dismissed. Mr. Dessai, the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant contended that the learned Additional District Judge initially granted an ex parte injunction as prayed for. However, by the impugned order, the application for injunction came to be rejected. It is submitted that the election to the Mapusa Municipal Council was held on 23.10.2005. The results of the election were declared on 24.10.2005, wherein the respondent No. 1 was declared elected as Councillor from the relevant Ward. It is contended that...

Sunil Vishnu Salve and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006CriLJ587

A.S. Bagga, J.1. Both these criminal appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 31/10/1994, passed by learned Additional Session Judge, Aurangabad in Session Case No. 14/1994, whereby the appellants (original accused Nos. 1 and 2) have been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the India Penal Code and Section 376 read with Section 109 of the India Penal Code respectively. Each of the accused has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 376 and for the offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section 109 of the India Penal Code respectively.2. Prosecutrix, aged about 20 years, namely Vandana resided with her parents at Milindnagar, Aurangabad. Accused also a young boy of about 23 years, resided in the neighbourhood while accused No. 2, a married woman, resided in rented premises in front of...

Sunil Kashinath Raimale Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006CriLJ589

N.V. Dabholkar, J. 1. Appeal Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against judgment and order dated 28.10.2004 delivered by 3rd Ad Hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, in Sessions Case No.69/2004. By the impugned judgment, trial Court has held appellant guilty for offences punishable under Section 302, 498A of IPC and sentenced him to suffer life imprisonment and rigorous imprisonment for 3 years on respective counts. In addition, he is also sentenced to fine of Rs.5,000/- on each count and rigorous imprisonment for two months in case of default also on each count.2. The incident in question took place on 29.1,2004 at about 7 or 7-30 a.m. at the place of accused i.e. village Punkheda Tq. Raver Dist. Jalgaon. There is no dispute that victim Sarlabai was married to appellant -accused about 10/11 years ago and the couple is gifted with 3 children, a son and two daughters. As admitted by PW 3 Vasant (father of the deceased), eldest son was aged 10 years and...

In Re: Sharp Industries Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2006]131CompCas535(Bom); [2006]67SCL353(Bom)

A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. The Petitioner has approached this Court to sanction the modified and amended scheme of compromise/arrangement as amended between Sharp Industries Limited the Petitioner Company and its secured, unsecured, statutory creditors and equity shareholders. It is also prayed that the reduction of the equity share capital in terms of the modified and amended scheme as approved by the special resolution passed by the equity shareholders of the Petitioner Company in their meeting held on 1st June 2005 be confirmed, and that, the order sanctioning the modified and amended scheme of compromise/arrangement be deemed to be an order confirming reduction in capital within the meaning of Section 102 of the Companies Act, 1956. 2. The Petitioner Company was incorporated on 9-3-1988 under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956. The Certificate of commencement of business was granted by the Registrar of Companies, Maharashtra, Mumbai on 9-3-1988. The authorised share capital of the Pe...

Dutron Plastics Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. All the four appeals are being disposed of by this common order inasmuch as common issue is involved. The refund claim of the appellant arising out of the year ending turn over discount has been rejected by the authorities below on the ground of unjust enrichment by observing that where credit notes are issued to the customers, subsequent to clearance of the goods, the same are not sufficient to hold that the burden of duty has not been passed on to the customers at the time of clearance of the goods.2. After hearing both sides, I find that the issue stands decided by the Larger Bench of this Tribunal reported in S. Kumar Ltd v. CCE as also in the case of Grasim Industries (Chemical Division) Ltd v. CCE, Bhopal . The appellants at the time of hearing, as also in the written submissions, have submitted that the aforesaid decisions of the Larger Bench solely relied upon the Tribunal's decision in the case of Sangam Processors (Bhilwara) Ltd on the ground that the civil appeals filed ...