Mumbai Court August 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.
V.P. Shanmugham Vs. Tukaram Anturkar (Dead by Lrs.) Vimlabai Wd/O Tuka ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-31-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)ALLMR213; 2006(1)MhLj592
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This is a writ petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India challenging the order dated 24-9-1991 passed by Additional Collector, Nagpur as Appellate Authority under Clause 21 of C.P. and Berar Rent Control Order, 1949 (referred as Rent Control Order hereafter) whereby said authority has allowed the appeal filed by respondent-tenant and has reversed the order dated 30-11-1988 passed by Rent Controller, Nagpur granting permission to petitioner landlord to terminate tenancy of respondent under Clause 13(3)(i)(ii) of Rent Control Order. 2. I have heard Advocate Shri Joshi for petitioner-landlord and Advocate Shri Shelat for respondent-tenant. After hearing both the counsels, I find that the case for remand is made out. Both the Advocates have stated that remand should not be ordered in the matter and this Court should itself decide it one way or the other. 3. Facts in brief are that the mother of petitioner filed application under Clause 13(3)(i)(ii) of Ren...
Prabhu Nagnath Surve Vs. I.B.P. Company Ltd. and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-31-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)ALLMR226; [2006(108)FLR1078]; 2006(2)MhLj273
F.I. Rebello, J.1. On behalf of the petitioner, learned counsel impugns the award dated 10-6-2002 of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1. It has refused to interfere with the punishment of dismissal on the petitioner herein.The petitioner impugned the award briefly on the following counts.It is firstly pointed out that the Criminal Court in respect of the offences which is the subject-matter of the charge-sheet and on which the charge-sheet was founded discharged the petitioner. Once the petitioner was discharged, the respondent-employer could not have proceeded with the enquiry. Secondly, it is submitted that the punishment imposed considering the charge proved and the past service record is disproportionate and consequently has to be set aside. It is further submitted that if the past record was to be considered, the petitioner ought to have been informed of the same so as to enable him to give his explanation. That has not been done and consequently, on that count, the ...
Laxminarayan S/O Shivshankar Mudliar Vs. Prakash S/O Krupashankar Meht ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-31-2005
Reported in: 2006(3)BomCR485; 2006(2)MhLj192
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This is landlord's Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India. The landlord sought permission of a Rent Controller, Nagpur under Clauses 13(3)(i), (ii), (v), (vi) and (vii) of C.P. and Berar House and Rent Control Order 1949 (hereinafter referred to as Rent Control Order). The Rent Controller granted permission only under Clauses 13(3)(i)(ii) and (vi) of Rent Control Order and this permission was challenged by respondent tenant in appeal before Appellate Authority and said authority has maintained permission granted only under Clause 13(3)(i) and has rejected the permission under other two clauses. It is in this background that the controversy needs to be considered. Clause 13(3)(i) contemplates situation in which the tenant was in arrears of rent for any aggregate period of three months on the date of filing of application by landlord before Rent Controller and tenant failed to deposit with Controller the amount of arrears ordered to be ...
Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd., Dr. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-2005
Reported in: (2006)(104)ECC255
1. The present appeals are against the order in original dtd 19th December, 2002 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhubaneshwar by the said order. It was held that the market value of 42 million deutche marks failed on merits being not supported by any legal provisions and thereafter it is submitted that the completely new ground which was not even alleged in the show cause notice was made out against the appellant assessee/importer purporting to hold that the value of the contract No. MD/601 dtd 22nd August, 1990 of 1 MDM under which technical documents imported from Portuguese Government Company, from Siderurgia Nacional (hereinafter referred to as SN for short) by the assessee/importer were to be part of value of 2120 tonnes Page 257 LD converters & other machinery imported. The goods imported by the assessee/imported in agreement being contract No. MD/601 dtd 22nd August, 1990 from SN. The Commissioner has held that the part of the value of the imported equipment was t...
Dimenxon Diamonds Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Acc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-2005
Reported in: (2006)(193)ELT373Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The issues involved in these three appeals being common, they are taken up for disposal by this common order, after hearing both sides.2. The importers are manufacturers and exporters of cut and polished diamonds and for the purpose of manufacturing cut and polished diamonds they require certain machines and parts thereof, which are imported.Such importers & the goods required in tutting and polishing gem stones, including diamonds, have been given exemption from the duties specified under the First Schedule to Customs Tariff Act. The parts/equipments are specified in the Table to Notification 159/86-Cus., dated 1-3-1986, as amended. The dispute, in the present case, relates to the eligibility to the imported goods, under Entry No.67 to the Table to the said Notification No. 159/86 which reads as under : The imported goods have been declared as "Steel pots bottom press pots" and in certain cases described as "top pots made up of steel" were also imported and claimed under the s...
Dy. Cit, Circle-6(2) Vs. Decibelle Electronics (P) Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-2005
Reported in: (2006)5SOT783(Mum.)
This appeal is filed by the revenue. The assessment year involved is 1995-96. It is directed against the order dated 23-3-2001 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) XLII and arises out of the assessment completed under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.The short issue involves in this appeal which we have to adjudicate is whether the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in directing the assessing officer to allow exemption under section 10A whereas the assessing officer had denied the exemption since the assessee had violated the conditions laid down in clause (i)(a) of sub-section (2) of section 10A of the Income Tax Act.We have heard the parties and have also perused the materials placed on record and applicable legal position.Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee is a company engaged in the dealing of computer related goods & services comprising of three units viz., Domestic Unit, Computer Division (located in SEEPZ) and Consumer Electronics Division (loc...
Addl. Cit (Asstt.), Special Vs. Hindalco Industries Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-2005
Reported in: (2005)4SOT757(Mum.)
First six appeals have been filed by the revenue and other two appeals have been filed by the assessee. The first set of three appeals are against the combined order of CIT(A) dated 30-3-1995 for the assessment years 1978-79,1979-80and 1980-81 whereas second set of three appeals are against another combined order of the CIT(A), dated 9-11-1995 for the same assessment years. In the order dated 30-3-1995 the CIT(A) partly set aside the order of the assessing officer dated 17-2-1995 and gave part relief. Against this order, the revenue has filed the appeals, which are numbered as 1173 to 1175. The assessing officer gave appeal effect to the order of the CIT(A) on 19-5-1995, which was challenged in appeal before CIT(A), who passed a combined order on 9-11-1995. Against this order of CIT(A), the revenue has preferred further appeal to the Tribunal, which are numbered as 69 to 71. The assessee preferred appeals for the assessment years 1979-80 and 1980-81, which are numbered as 1308 and 130...
Ashish Aggarwal Vs. University of Mumbai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALLMR785; 2006(3)BomCR133; 2006(1)MhLj137
Dalveer Bhandari, C.J. 1. The petitioner passed the final year of LL.B. Course in the year 2003 from the Government Law College, affiliated to the University of Mumbai. The petitioner has an impressive academic career. The petitioner appeared in third year of five years' LL.B. Course in May, 2001 and secured second rank in the University. However, the score of the petitioner in the subject of 'Legal Language' was unusually low at 58 out of 100. Since the petitioner had previously been scoring high marks in this subject, he suspected an error in assessment. On the advice of his professors, the petitioner applied for revaluation of his answer-sheet in the subject.2. On re-valuation of his answer-sheet, the error was rectified and his marks were increased from 58 to 69 out of 100. The change in the marks was intimated to the petitioner vide letter of the University dated 5th February, 2002. On rectification, according to the petitioner, after re-valuation of the marks secured by him, the ...
Mumbai Port Trust Retired Employees' Association and Ors. Vs. Union of ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALLMR528; 2006(1)MhLj160
Dalveer Bhandari, C.J. 1. This petition has been filed by the Mumbai Port Trust Retired Employees' Association and two others with the prayer that the respondents be directed to allow the retirees enlisted at Exhibit 'A' to the petition to exercise the option and give benefits to them fulfilling the conditions laid down by the Scheme of Option.2. It is also prayed that the respondents be directed to declare that the retirees enlisted at Exhibit 'A' to the petition are eligible and entitled to exercise option as per the Voluntary Retirement (Extended) Scheme, 1991.3. The brief facts, which are necessary to highlight the controversy involved in this petition, are recapitulated as under :4. Under the Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 1992 (hereinafter, 'SVRS, 1992', for short), two options of retirement were available :(i) Pensionary benefits under which retirees were eligible for payment of their terminal dues, such as, Provident Fund contribution. Gratuity under the Gratuity Act, 197...
Chief Executive Officer, Sangli Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Manag ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-2005
Reported in: (2006)ILLJ799Bom
B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. The Petitioner Bank has suffered a decree of execution in a sum of Rs. 37,51,800/- passed by the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (for short 'the Act') confirmed by the lower Appellate Authority i. e. the District Court. The facts relating to this petition and which are not in dispute may be listed as under.2. The Petitioner is an Urban Co-operative Bank and it had advanced loan to Respondent No. 2, a Private Limited Company Respondent No. 1 is a trade union registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926 and it claimed to represent the workmen employed by the Respondent No. 2. It was claimed that about 90 workmen were employed by Respondent No. 2 and from January 1991, the said factory was closed down. Prior to January 1990, there was a lay-off in the said factory. The Respondent No. 1 union therefore approached the Competent Authority and the Judge of the Labour Court by filing an application under Section 15(2) of the Act. The present Petitioner was i...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »