Mumbai Court March 2005 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.
A.R. Gurwada and Vijay Paper Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-2005
Reported in: (2005)(185)ELT145Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appeals are being disposed by this common order after hearing both sides and finding (a) The appellants are a registered SSI unit who had claimed benefit of the exemption under Notification No. 8/99 dated 28.02.99. They had also filed classifications list No. 3 dated 19.9.200 claiming exemption under Notification 5/99 with effect from 1.5.99, due to certain incorrect advice made to claim benefit 8/99. The lower authorities wide letter dated 6.5.99 informed the assessee that after exemption limit of 1 crore availed to be full duty was to be paid instead of exempted claim under notification No. 5/99 due to the provisions of para 2(1) of notification 8/99. (b) Condition para of notification 8/99 stood omitted from 31.3.99 by amending notification 16/CE dated 31.3.99. In this view of the matter no reason can be found to deny the claim of the benefit of 8/99 and thereafter tandem the benefit of Notification 5/99 to this manufacture of paper following the decisions in the case of Amb...
Central Bank of India and anr. Vs. Testeels Ltd. and ors.
Court: DRAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-2005
Reported in: I(2007)BC183
1. Both these appeals can be conveniently disposed off by this common judgment and order as they arise from the same judgment and order, parties are same and issue involved is also the same.Appeal No. 30 of 2004 is filed by the appellants/original applicants Central Bank of India and Canara Bank being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 4th November, 2003 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of D.R.T., Ahmedabad in T.A. No. 568 of 1995 in civil suit No.70 of 1992. Appeal No. 31 of 2004 is filed by the appellants/original applicant Central Bank of India being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 4th November, 2003 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of D.R.T., Ahmedabad in T.A. No. 567 of 1995 in Civil Suit No. 69 of 1992. For the sake of convenience, facts are taken from the appeal No.30 of 2004.2. The appellant Central Bank of India and Canara Bank, at the request of the defendants agreed to provide general credit facilities aggregating to Rs. 6,00,00,000/- in the r...
Suresh Narbharam Kachalia Vs. Shakti Insulated Wires Ltd. and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)BomCR387; [2005(106)FLR545]; 2005(3)MhLj130
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. The workman is before the Court in a challenge to an order passed by the Industrial Court on 17th August 2001, dismissing his revision against an order of the Labour Court dated 21st November 2000. While holding the management guilty of an unfair labour practice under Item 1(f) of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, the Labour Court directed the management to pay to the workman an amount of Rs. 1.08 lakhs in lieu of reinstatement.2. The Petitioner was appointed in a clerical position with the First Respondent on 25th July 1963. After he had worked for nearly 23 years, he was transferred on 3rd February 1986 to the Management Accounts Department. On 5th October 1987, the Petitioner is stated to have voluntarily requested a transfer which plea is stated to have been refused on 10th October 1987. On 27th January 1989, he was transferred to the Sales Department. On 28th April 1989, the Petiti...
Dilip Vasant Shinde Vs. Brihan Mumbai Municipal Corporation and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Bom169; 2005(3)BomCR609; 2005(2)MhLj865
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. A shop (Shop No. 55) in the Municipal Market known as Hirachand Desai Municipal Market at H. D. Road, Ghatkopar, Mumbai, was allotted to the Petitioner in 1988 on licence. The licence which was issued under Sections 401, 411 and 479 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, was subject to certain terms and conditions. The stall age charges at the rate of Rs.765/-per month were liable to be paid in respect of each shop allotted to persons in the market. The trade which was registered by the Petitioner in his application for licence was that of plumber. stall age charges for the period from January 1997 were not paid by the Petitioner in breach of the licence conditions.Under the conditions of licence, the licensee was required to pay in advance the amount payable for each month within the first 15 days of the month. The licensee was required to obtain a receipt duly signed by the Assistant Superintendent of Markets for every payment. The licence conditions sp...
H. Jayarama Shetty Vs. the Sangli Bank Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALLMR10; 2005(3)BomCR10; [2005(106)FLR357]; (2005)IIILLJ637Bom; 2005(3)MhLj609
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. The Central Regional Labour Commissioner acting as Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, allowed an appeal against an order of the Controlling Authority. As a result of the decision of the Appellate Authority, the claim of the Petitioner for the payment of gratuity stands dismissed. The Appellate Authority has held that (i) Inasmuch as the Petitioner had been posted at Belgaum in the State of Karnataka, prior to an order transferring him to Sangli, the Adjudicating Authority in Maharashtra would have no jurisdiction; (ii) The claim for the payment of gratuity is barred by limitation; and (iii) Though the Petitioner had resigned from service and there was no termination of his services for any misconduct causing damage or loss to, or the destruction of the property belonging to the employer, the forfeiture of gratuity was justified. For the reasons indicated in the judgment hereinafter, I have come to the conclusion that the order passed by ...
ishwardas S/O Damodhardas Sindhi Vs. Smt. Shantabai W/O Sewakram Chaur ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)BomCR442; 2005(3)MhLj260
P.S. Brahme, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the records.2. Appellant/tenant of the suit premises has preferred this appeal challenging the judgment and order dt. 8-9-2003 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 1069 of 2003 dismissing the petition.3. The facts, in brief, relating to this litigation are stated as under :Appellant is, admittedly, a tenant of the suit premises which is being used as a godown admeasuring 9 ft. x 20 ft. Respondent No. 1 landlady who has let out the suit premises to the appellant applied for permission to terminate tenancy under Clause 13(3)(i)(ii)(vi) and (vii) of the C.P. and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 (hereinafter called for short as 'the Rent Control Order, 1949'). The said proceeding was registered as a Revenue Case No. 698/A-71(2)/85-86 in the year 1986 against the appellant. The rent was Rs. 100/- p.m. exclusive of electric and water charges. It was the case of landlady that when she purch...
Marathwada Association for Social Services Vs. State of Maharashtra an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)BomCR784; 2005(3)MhLj308
M.G. Gaikwad, J.1. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties, petitions are heard and decided finally.2. These two petitions have been decided by this common judgment as in both petitions point involved and relief claimed is one and the same.Writ Petition No. 7676/04 is a petition filed by the petitioner trust seeking direction against the respondents 1 to 3 to quash and set aside the publication dated 22-12-2004 issued by respondent No. 3 staying admission process for B.Ed. college of the petitioner institution for academic year 2004-05 and direct them to complete the admission process as per advertisement dated 19-12-2004 and 20-12-2004.Writ Petition No. 7677/04 has been filed for the same relief by the students claiming that they are eligible for the admission for B.Ed. course and as the process of admission was stayed as such they were deprived of getting admission with the request they are loosing their career.3. Petitioner trust is registered under Bombay Public Trust...
Giridhar S/O Vishwanath Pise Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)MhLj880
S.T. Kharche, J.1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of parties.2. Mr. Daga, learned counsel, for the applicant contended that offence bearing Crime No. 138 of 2003 punishable under Sections 147, 148, 308, 323 and 324 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code has been registered at police station Warora which is arising out of the incident which occurred on 27-8-2003 at about 18-00 hours at Waghnakh. He contended that a cross case bearing Crime No. 139 of 2003 for the offence punishable under Section 323 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code has also been registered, which is also arising out of the said incident which occurred on 27-8-2003 at about 18-00 hours at Waghnakh. The latter crime has been registered on the basis of the complaint of the applicant. Mr. Daga, learned counsel, further contended that since there are counter or cross cases, it is desirable that both the criminal cases should be disposed of by the same Court and the judgments should be pronounce...
Shri Gopilal Son of Kanhaiyalal Saval Vs. Shri Manilal Son of Gopalrao ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALLMR694; (2005)107BOMLR1557
K.J. Rohee, J.1. The original defendant has preferred this second, appeal against the judgment of the District Judge, Nagpur, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 411/1.983 dismissing appeal against the judgment and decree in Regular Civil Suit No. 1285/1974 (Initially registered as Civil Suit No. 1657/1971) passed by 12th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nagpur directing the defendant to deliver vacant possession of the suit block to the respondent/original plaintiff (who is now represented by his L.Rs.) along with arrears of rent and costs and inquiry into future mesne profits. 2. The brief facts relevant for the purposes of the present appeal are as under: The only admitted fact is that the appellant occupied a block in house No. 58 as a tenant on 12.8.1965. According to the respondent the monthly rent is Rs. 30/- whereas according to the appellant the monthly rent is Rs. 15/-. According to the respondent, the suit block is owned by him whereas according to the appellant the suit block be...
Special Land Acquisition Officer (North Goa), Konkan Railway Corporati ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-2005
Reported in: (2005)107BOMLR800
A.P. Lavande, J.1. By this appeal, the appellants challenge the Award dated 6.9.2002. passed by the Second Addl. District Judge, Panaji in Land Acquisition Case No. 211/1996. By Notification dated 23.9.91, an area of 1.58,781 sq. metres was acquired for the Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd. An area of 3575 sq. metres of Survey No. 168/2 of Village Malar, Tiswadi Taluka, belonging to the respondent was also acquired by the said notification. On 7.3.1994, the Land Acquisition Officer declared the award and fixed the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs. 16/- per sq. metre. Dissatisfied with the award, the respondent sought reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter, referred to as 'the Act'), claiming compensation at the rate of Rs. 200/- per sq. metre. In the Reference Court, the respondent examined himself as A.W. 1 and one Loyala Menezes as A.W. 2 and produced some documents. The respondent relied upon two sale deeds and also produced notice...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »