Mumbai Court February 2005 Judgments

Goldcrest Exports Vs. Swissoen N.V. and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(3)ARBLR58(Bom); 2005(4)BomCR225

Vazifdar S.J., J.1. This is an appeal against the order of the learnedSingle Judge dismissing the appellants petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to challenge an award passed by the second respondent. The Federation of Oils, Seeds and Fats Associations Ltd. (FOSFA).2. The two questions, both of which we have answered in the negative,.that arise for our consideration are :(i) Whether a party against whom a foreign award is made is entitled to challenge the same under Section 34 of the Act?(ii) Whether the mere denial of the existence of the agreement by the party against whom an award is made is entitled to challenge the same under Section 34 if the award otherwise would be a foreign award and despite the party in whose favour the award is made stating that it treats the award as a foreign award and shall not either seek its enforcement or rely upon the same for any purpose as a domestic award.3. The controversy lies in a very narrow compass. The...

Dinkar S/O Govind Pujari Vs. Divisional Controller, Maharashtra State ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(1)BomCR905; 2005(3)MhLj651

Naresh H. Patil, J.1. This petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 19-3-1993 passed by the learned Member, Industrial Court, Nasik in Revision Application (ULP) No. 500/1992.2. The petitioner filed a complaint under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter called as 'the said Act'). He contended before the Labour Court that he was in service of respondent M.S.R.T.C. since 1976 as a conductor. His past service record was unblemish. On 25-11-1986 when he was on duty, the bus was checked near Palaskheda, Tal. Bhadgaon by the squad of M.S.R.T.C. He was on duty on the route Shirpur - Pachora. Five persons boarded the bus at Dhule who were to proceed to Pachora and they were found travelling without proper tickets but, it was found that they had paid full fare for the journey. As against ticket of Rs. 10.50 for each of the passengers, the group of five passengers was found possessing tickets wo...

Deepak S/O Laxman Shinde Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(4)MhLj252

ORDERA.S. Bagga, J.1. The applicant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 7 as also Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. On first count he is sentenced for R.I. for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default to suffer R.I. for six months. For second count, he has been sentenced to undergo R. I. for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default, to suffer further R. I for six months. The applicant has preferred criminal appeal and the appeal has been admitted.2. By order on separate application, i.e. Criminal Application No. 16/2005, the applicant has been admitted to bail. By the present application, the applicant has prayed for suspension of the order of conviction. The argument is that the applicant/convict is an employee of M.S.E.B. and because of the conviction, his services are likely to be terminated. It is further pointed out that if the applicant succeeds in appeal, even on his reinstatement, ...

Sukhdas S/O Mulchand Shende Vs. the State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)107BOMLR1500

S.T. Kharche, J.1. This appeal takes an exception to the judgment and order of conviction dated 16.3.1996 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions trial No. 382 of 1992, whereby the appellant/accused has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part II of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 15 days. However, the appellant/accused has been acquitted of the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 324 of Indian Penal Code and the State did not prefer any appeal against the acquittal nor has preferred any appeal for enhancement of the sentence imposed on the accused for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part II of Indian Penal Code. 2. Brief facts are required to be stated as under : (a) The spot of incident is situated in the hutment area of Mang Garodi Toli, Tharsa Road, Kanhan. The deceased and accused own the huts sit...

Punjaram Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005CriLJ4658

ORDERNaresh H. Patil, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. A question raised before this Court is as to whether a report filed under Section 173(2) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter, referred to as 'the Code' for the sake of brevity), without filing the investigation papers, as envisaged under Section 173(5) of the Code, which is referred to as 'charge-sheet', defeats the indefeasible right of the accused conferred by the provisions of Section 167(2) of the Code.3. On a complaint filed on 22-7-2004 by one Radhabai Chate widow of the deceased a Crime at No. 116/2004 came to be registered with the Mantha Police Station, Dist. Jalna, for an offence punishable under Sections 302, 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. In connection with the said offence the applicants along with three other accused persons were arrested by the police on different dates and after they were remanded for few days in the police custody, were remanded to Magisterial custody.4. T...

Anup Rajendra Singh Khamkar and ors. Vs. Divisional Controller, Mahara ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: IV(2006)ACC889; 2006ACJ2180

D.G. Deshpande, J.1. Heard advocates compensation from Rs. 1,80,000 that was for the appellants and the respondent. This awarded by the Tribunal. The claimants appeal is filed by the appellants who are lost their father. The mother had already the original claimants for enhancement of predeceased the father. Claimant No. 1 was 18 years old. He was the son and the two claimants were minor daughters aged about 13 years and 10 years respectively at the time of application. Salary of deceased was Rs. 3,000 per month. Tribunal accepted Rs. 2,000 per month as dependency, but adopted multiplier of 7 only. It is this part of the order which is challenged in the present appeal.2. Learned Counsel for the respondent strenuously urged that multiplier has been properly adopted by the Tribunal looking to the age of the deceased father as 40 years. He, therefore, contended that no interference is required for.3. I do not find any substance in this submission. The children/claimants were aged about 18...

Bilag Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This is an application under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 filed by the appellants for granting waiver of the pre-deposit and to stay its recovery as passed in the impugned Order dated 30.08.2004.2. The appellants are, inter alia, engaged in the manufacture of chemicals, pesticides, etc. falling under Chapter 28, 29 and 38 of the Central Excise Tariff, 1985 and are availing Cenvat credit of duty paid on the inputs used in the manufacture of the final product. One of the inputs used by them is Light Diesel Oil (LDO), which is used as fuel in the appellant's factory. The LDO is used as a fuel for generation of steam. The steam so generated is further used for the manufacture of final product within the factory. Some quantity of steam so generated by the appellants was transferred to M/s. Mitsu Ltd. (Mitsu) situated in the same premises where the appellant's factory is also situated.Mitsu is also using the steam for manufacture of dutiable final product. The steam is ful...

Heat Shrink Technologies Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This is an application under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, filed by the appellants for waiver of pre-deposit amount and to stay its recovery.2. The matter pertains to admissibility of Cenvat credit and dutiability.3. M/s. Heat Shrink Technologies Ltd. assemble two types of Joining Kits - one for telecom and the other for energy/power. They were paying duty on the Cable Joining Kits used for energy/power, but they did not pay duty on the Cable Joining Kits for telecom.4. Show Cause Notice was issued for recovery of duty of Rs. 8,89,66,738.04 on Cable Joining Kits for telecom. The appellants continued paying the duty on the power kits and availed of the Modvat credit on the inputs that went into the power kits. They, however, were not paying any duty on the telecom kits. In this regard, a Show Cause Notice was issued for the same. The matter went up to the Supreme Court and it was decided that the telecom kits assembly did not amount to manufacture.5. Again in the year...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Ahmedabad Steel Craft Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Heard both sides in this rectification of mistake application filed by Revenue.2. Vide Order No. A-840-841/WZB/2004/C-IV dated 5.8.2004, this Tribunal had ordered that the respondent herein (M/s Ahmedabad Steel Craft Ltd) had shown a photocopy of a stamped acknowledgement of Order-in-Appeal No. 156/2003 (156-A-II)/CE/Commr (A-III) dated 27.6.2003, issued on 18.7.2003 (attested by the Superintendent on 16.7.2003) have not been served in the office of the Assistant Commissioner and others. Hence Revenue's application did not bring any reasons for seeking condonation of delay not having filed this appeal after arriving at a finding that the date of receipt as on 24.07.2003 given in the EA3 form is not born out from the facts on record. The appeal was therefore dismissed being barred by limitation as reasons for condonation of delay was not explained and application for the same was not filed.3. In the present rectification of mistake application, the grounds taken are: (i) the Tribuna...

Psl Ltd. and Shri F.S. Negi Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(100)ECC588

1. Appellants are an assessee (herein after refers, to M/s PSL) are interalia engaged in manufacture of spiral welded steel pipes at the unit at Daman and the General Manager of the appellant company.2.1 While pipes manufactured at Daman, are cleared as 'bare pipes' from the "Pipe Mill" to another unit of M/s PSL referred to as "Coating Unit" where cement/coal tar coating or PE coating is effected as per requirements of the customer & thereafter coated pipes are cleared to the customers site over a distance of 20 Km to 1800 kms, depending upon the location.2.2 Issue is valuation of pipes, removed from the 'Pipe Mill' without paying duty, on value of coating effected at 'coating mill' not reckoned on the count that coating does not amount to manufacture the said part of duty as well as on transport charges collected upto the delivery site ex. Daman plant or and on profits made on excess of Transport charges over actuals following Borode Electirc meters v. CCE 1997 (94) ELT 13 SC fo...