Mumbai Court December 2005 Judgments

Sakharam Laxman Mathane Since Deceased by His Heirs and Lrs. Rangubai ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(2)ALLMR362; 2006(2)MhLj644

Anoop V. Moha, J.1. This is a second appeal filed by the appellant original plaintiff and thereby sought to challenge the concurrent findings given by the Courts below, of dismissing the suit for declaration that the agreement dated 1st February, 1966, was void and illegal and the defendant has no right to retain the possession of the property on the strength of said agreement to sale and prayer for possession of the suit property. The appeal was admitted on 31-8-1989 on the following substantial questions of law;Whether the defence of Section 53-A of Transfer of Property Act (T.P. Act), was available to the respondents in the facts and circumstances of the case.2. The appellant-plaintiff being the owner of the land bearing survey No. 143/11, of village Nade, Tal. Patan, on 1st February, 1966, entered into an agreement for sale in favour of the defendants (Exh. 57). Based on the said agreement the defendants are in possession. The defendants issued the notice and called upon the plaint...

Sarva Shramik Sangh and ors. Vs. Kamala Mills and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(3)ALLMR176; 2006(5)BomCR861; [2006(109)FLR792]; (2006)IILLJ468Bom; 2006(2)MhLj690

R.M. Lodha, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 7th April, 1997 whereby the learned Single Judge rejected the writ petition in limine.2. The controversy arises, in the circumstances, which we briefly advert first.3. Kamala Mills-respondent No. 1 is the textile industry and covered under the provisions of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 (for short 'Act of 1946'). There was a strike in the textile industry including Kamala Mills in the year 1982. As a result thereof, the services of the present appellants and the employees named in Exhibit 'A' who were employed in the Art Silk Section of Kamala Mills were terminated. The termination of these employees resulted into reference under the Act of 1946. During the pendency of the said reference, Sick Industrial Companies special Provisions) Act, 1985 (for short 'Act of 1985') came into force and thereunder Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) constituted. As Kamala Mills was a sick company, the r...

Girish J. Bobade Vs. Ajay Thakur and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(2)ALLMR381; 2006(2)MhLj702

Nishita Mhatre, J.1. This petition is filed under Section 11 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890. The petitioner is seeking guardianship of his minor daughters who are in the custody of their mother, the petitioner's wife. The question which has arisen in this petition is whether such petition is maintainable before this Court in view of the provisions of the Family Courts Act, 1984 and the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Romila Jaidev Shroff v. Jaidev Rajnikant Shroff : AIR2000Bom356 : (2000) DMC 600 (II).2. Since this is an important question of law which would affect several matters, I requested the learned Advocate General to address the Court. He has brought to my notice various provisions of law which have enabled me to deliver this judgment. Ms. Swati Deshpande, who was appointed as amicus curiae has also rendered able assistance in the matter. I am grateful to both the learned Advocate General as well as Ms. Swati Deshpande for their valuable assistance...

Divyesh K. Kothari Vs. Aatam Gems and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(2)ALLMR391; 2006(4)BomCR471; 2006(2)MhLj744

S.J. Vazifdar, J.1. This suit is filed to recover a sum of Rs 25,67,850/- together with interest at 18% p.a. from the date of filing of the suit till payment.2. Defendant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are the partners of defendant No. 1.3. The plaintiffs case is that on 16th February, 2001, defendant No. 3 represented to him that his overseas clients were interested in buying diamonds of specified qualities and quantities. Defendant No. 3 further represented that the diamonds were required for inspection and examination by the prospective purchasers.4. Pursuant thereto the plaintiff handed over to the defendants eight diamonds of different qualities. The diamonds were forwarded along with writings titled 'ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ENTRUSTMENT'. In the trade they are known as 'Jangad' notes. The eight diamonds were forwarded under three identical Jangad notes which also specified the value of the diamonds in Rupees per carat. The Jangad notes dated 20th February, 2001, 22nd February, 2001 and 22nd February, ...

The Supreme Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(104)ECC616

1. Heard both sides. The issue relates to valuation of agriculture pipes and fittings. The appellants have prayed for the following: (a) that the reasons for giving different discounts have been elaborately listed in the impugned Order-in-Original No. 118/99 dtd. 31.8.1999 and hence, Dept.'s/Commissioner (Appeals) claiming/holding that no criteria exists for allowing different discounts is incorrect: (b) that the discounts allowed to different buyers is not only known prior to removal of goods from factory but also such discounts have been allowed in the Central Excise Invoices itself; (c) that the invoices indicate the list price, percentage of discounts and the volume of discounts and net sales price which is the assessable value known prior to clearance of goods from factory; (d) that the Dept's claim that discount in excess of minimum discount not admissible has no authority of law; (e) that such differing discounts allowed is nothing but regional discounts which are permissible; ...

Standard Industries Ltd. Vs. Ccex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Heard both sides. The impugned fabric manufactured by the appellants is dot printed with HDPE. The lower authority has held that the fabric is coated fabric on the ground that 60% of the surface of the fabric is coated with dots. The appellants have pleaded that the Hon'ble High Courts of Allahabad and Gujarat [vide J.D. Patel and Anr. v. UOI 1978 ELT (J 540)] have held that in coating the intention would be to cover virtually the entire surface of the material sought to be coated, and that the process which leaves a considerable area uncovered would not be called coating. We find merit in the contention of the appellants and their reliance on the cited case laws. Hence, we are of the view that the impugned material cannot be considered as coated fabric.2. As regards valuation, it is the claim of the appellants that for the earner period, following the Tribunal's decision in their own case, the department has accepted that there was no mutuality of interest between the appellants a...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Shabnam Synthetics

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Heard the Ld. SDR in the miscellaneous application filed by the Revenue and ld. Advocate Shri Mayur Shroff for the respondent. Vide order No. S/344-345/WZB/2005-C-II dt. 10th May, 2005, the Bench after noting that goods worth Rs. 12 lakhs (Rupees twelve lakhs only) had been confiscated & were lying in the safe custody of the applicants unit and the applicants had not exercised the option of redeeming the goods offered by the authorities below. Therefore, there was no need to seek waiver of pre-deposit of duty and the tribunal thereafter felt that only a consideration of pre-deposit of penalties was required to be arrived & made in this case; thereafter noting that the goods valued at over Rs. 12 lakhs (Rupees twelve lakhs only) confiscated, would prima facie render interest of the Revenue safeguarded. The requirement of pre-deposit of penalty of Rs. 50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) was ordered with stay of recovery thereof pending the appeals.2. Vide this application, th...

Sanobar Travels Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. (Appeals)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The applications for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax and penalty as detailed in the annexure to the stay order arise out of the three separate orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) holding that the applicants are liable to pay service tax as they are rendering services under Rent-a-cab Scheme Operator Service.2. We have heard both sides, we find that a strong prima facie case has been made out for waiver of pre-deposit on the ground that the demands are barred by limitation as in all these three cases, the department has earlier issued show cause notice covering the period subsequent to the one covered in the present notices, and therefore the Tribunal's orders holding that once an earlier show cause notice has been issued for a particular period, subsequent notice for a period prior thereto is barred by limitation would be applicable squarely to the facts of the present case, we therefore waive pre-deposit of service tax and penalty and stay recovery thereof pending these appe...

Reliance Energy Ltd. (Formerly Vs. the D.C.i.T., Special Range 30

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)103ITD223(Mum.)

1. These two appeals, pertaining to the same assessee are disposed of, for the sake of convenience, by this common order as under: 2. This appeal arises from the order dated 27.12.93 of CIT(A)-XII, Mumbai. The grounds No. 1 to 5 pertain to the same issue i.e., confirmation by the ld. CIT(A) of disallowance of Rs. 16,61,03,713/- being the amount appropriated by the assessee company towards the Reserve for the new power generation project at Dahanu. The ld.counsel, Shri P.J. Pardiwala, appearing for the assessee was fair enough to point out that this issue arose during the immediately preceding AY 90-91 and was decided against the assessee vide ITAT's order dated 20.10.97 in ITA No. 7839/Bom/93 (copy at pages 21 to 32 of the Paper Book). The ld. counsel, however, contended that in respect of the AY 90-91, the assessee mainly relied on the Bombay High Court decision in the case of Somaiya Orgeno Chemicals Ltd. (SOCL) v. CIT 216 ITR 291, before the Tribunal, and the Tribunal has also refe...

Shri Hanmant Laxman Salunke Since Deceased by His Heirs Smt. Alka Hanm ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2006Bom123; 2006(3)ALLMR38; 2006(2)BomCR254

B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. In this Second Appeal admitted on 6-11-1996, this Court has framed the following substantial questions of law: (i) It ought to have been held that the adoption in law was invalid and illegal as the mandatory provisions of Sections 4, 5, 10 and 11 of the Hindu Adoption Act of 1956 have not been followed and complied with. (ii) Section 4 has an overriding effect of the Act and even the custom or usage which formed the part of the law immediately before the commencement of this Act shall cease to have any effect with respect to any matter for which provision is made in this Act. Therefore, in this regard both the Courts have committed a grave error in law in giving effect to the custom or usage prevailing prior to the coming into force of the 1956 Act. (iii) In this case the provisions of Section 10(iii) and (iv) have not at all been complied with. Admittedly, the Respondent was married at the time of adoption and he had also completed the age of 15 years at that tim...