Mumbai Court September 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.
Sony Kabushiki Kaisha (Also) Trading as Sony Corporation Vs. Aashish E ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)MhLj175; 2006(33)PTC336(Bom)
Anoop V. Mohta, J. 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties. The suit dated 20th August, 2003, is basically for injunction and for an appropriate order of restrain meant against the defendants from using the trademark 'SONY' by naming and spelling it 'SONNY' or any word deceptively similar thereto in connection with its business as it would tantamount to infringement and/or passing off. The cause of action, as per the plaintiffs, arose in January, 2001, when they first learnt about the defendants activities of using 'SONNY' on their electric good like AC Adapter and offering the same for the sale in the market. In spite of due notice, as defendants failed to desist themselves from using the said word, the present suit has been filed on 29th September, 2003. A Notice of Motion has been taken out by plaintiffs for urgent ad-interim relief.2. There is undisputed position of facts that plaintiffs have been selling this product under the trademark 'SONY' in India since the yea...
Amar Singh S/O Narendra Singh Bais Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ1538; I(2006)DMC572; 2006(1)MhLj430
K.J. Rohee, J.1. Heard finally by consent of parties.The applicant is one of the accused persons facing trial for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 304B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in Session Trial No. 90/2003. The applicant failed to secure bail on merits. Thereafter, by order dated 10th May, 2004 the applicant was released by the trial Court as it was found that the applicant was of unsound mind and was incapable of making his defence. It seems that after the release of the applicant he ceased to be of unsound mind and the trial not only resumed but had proceeded inasmuch as on 5th November, 2004 PW Nos. 1 and 2 were examined by the prosecution. It seems that thereafter, no prosecution witness turned up and the trial was adjourned from time to time.2. On 30th March, 2005 the learned A.P.P., in-charge of the trial, moved an application for cancellation of the bail of the applicant on the ground that the ...
Century Textile and Industries Ltd. Vs. Bhagirathmal D. Sharma and anr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)MhLj580
B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. This petition arises from the order passed by the Industrial Tribunal of Maharashtra at Thane on 10th March, 1995 in Application (IT) No. 4 of 1989. The petitioner employer had filed the said application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act') seeking approval for the action of dismissal of the respondent-employee from service by way of punishment in the pending Reference (IT) No. 51 of 1982.2. The respondent was employed as an attendant in the Bardana Department (of Scrapyard) of the petitioner-Company and he was issued a charge-sheet on 17th February, 1987 for the acts of misconducts while on duty, under clause No. 24(d) and 24(m) of the Model Standing Orders applicable to him i.e. theft, fraud or dishonesty in connection with the employer's business and gross negligence. It was alleged that Truck No. MMS-2411 had come to the factory for loading of scrap material and the respondent-employee who was responsible for the su...
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Shrishail Basavraj Ka ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2005
Reported in: II(2006)ACC393; 2006(3)ALLMR677; 2006(1)BomCR209; 2006(3)MhLj126
Kanade V.M., J.1. The award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Satara, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 127 of 1986 is being challenged by the appellant- Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation. The Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, hereinafter referred to as 'the MACT', by its common judgment and award dated 31st December, 1988, in respect of 19 applications filed for compensation against the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, hereinafter referred to as 'the MSRTC', had awarded compensation to the respondents to the tune of Rs. 2,52,000/-with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realisation of the said amount.FACTS:2. Brief facts of this appeal are as under: -The S.T. bus owned by the appellant MSRTC, which was travelling from Satara to Bombay on 17th January, 1986, had met with an accident in Khambatki Ghat, Lonawala, and the bus fell into a valley which was approximately 327 feet deep and, as a result ...
Anchor Health and Beauty Care Ltd. and anr. Vs. Municipal Corporation ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALLMR727; [2006]132CompCas689(Bom); 2006(1)MhLj619; [2006]66SCL116(Bom)
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. Heard forthwith. M/s Nihon Electronics Ltd., (In Liquidation) had a factory premises situated at Plot No. D-10, MIDC, Marol, Andheri (East), Mumbai. Pursuant to Company Petition No. 6289 of 1984 the Official Liquidator was appointed for the properties of the said company in liquidation both movable and immovable. On 20th June, 2003 the Official Liquidator issued a public notice for sale of the immovable property of the company. The auction took place on 23rd July, 2003 and the offer by the petitioner No. 1 was accepted for a total consideration of Rs. 4.10 crores. On 6th August, 2003 the entire consideration of Rs. 4.10 crores was paid in the office of the Official Liquidator. On 12th August, 2003 the physical possession of the immovable property as described earlier was given to the petitioners. The Official Liquidator on 17th October, 2003 executed the Deed of Assignment in favour of the petitioner No. 1.2. After the property had vested in the petitioner No. ...
Bharat Kanakia and anr. Vs. Mumbai Building Repairs and Reconstruction ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALLMR361; 2006(1)BomCR201
Rebello F.I., J.1. Rule. Heard forthwith. The petitioners have approached this Court to impugn the order bearing No. R/NOC/F-435/1557/MBRRB-05. By this order the Chief Officer of the Mumbai Building Repairs and Reconstruction Board has directed that the Dave Brothers who are respondent Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 8 to 12 as legal representatives of Ramakant R. Dave to be reaccommodated in the reconstructed building. The order further directs that the occupiers shown against them shall be evicted and Dave Brothers shall be reaccommodated within seven days. The brothers as listed are Shri Shailesh R. Dave, Shri Bharat R. Dave, legal representative of late Shri Ramakant R. Dave and Shri Mukund R. Dave. The learned Chief Officer was pleased to hold that the Authority premises are defined under Section 2(iv) of the MHADA Act, 1976 to mean any premises entrusted to or placed at the disposal of Authority for the management and use for the purpose of the Act. Similarly, the occupants other than tenants ...
Keshav Shankar Ekbote Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALLMR624; 2006(3)BomCR404; 2006(1)MhLj292
B.R. Gavai, J. 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. By way of present petition, the petitioner assails the order passed by respondent No. 1 thereby dismissing the complaint of the petitioner under Section 55-A of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Said Act'), vide order dated 9th July, 2003.3. Respondent No. 2 was elected as a President of the respondent No. 5-Buldana Municipal Council in the General elections which were held in the year 2001 and she assumed the charge of the Office of the President of respondent No. 5-Municipal Council, Buldana on 18th December, 2001. The petitioner who is resident of Buldana and also Ex-President of the Municipal Council filed a complaint under the provisions of Section 55-A of the said Act on 14th February, 2003 with the respondent No. 1-State of Maharashtra. It is stated in the complaint that the husband of responde...
Sardarkhan S/O Khalilkhan Pathan Vs. Range Forest Officer and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)MhLj606
R.C. Chavan, J.1. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the Appellate order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pusad, upholding the order of Authorised Officer confiscating the tractor and trolley belonging to the petitioner. 2. Facts, which led to the eventual filing of this petition, are as under : 3. On 19-7-1999, two bullock-carts loaded with teakwood were intercepted by the Range Forest Officer, Bittargaon. They were seized by him and a forest offence was registered. The persons, who were accompanying the carts and teakwood, were arrested. Their statements were recorded. In the course of investigation, statements of three more persons were recorded on 23-8-1999 and the spot from where teak trees had been cut, was seen. The investigation revealed that the trees cut from that spot were loaded in tractor bearing registration No. MH 26 C 1973 and trolley bearing registration No. MH 26 C 8380 belonging to the petitioner. The tractor and trolley were accordingly seiz...
Maharashtra Distilleries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-15-2005
Reported in: (2006)(193)ELT371Tri(Mum.)bai
1. By the impugned order, the Collector of Customs has inter alia held 15,664.50 bulk litres of goods described as "Undenatured Ethyl Alcohol (Malt Spirits plus or minus 59.3% Vol.)" imported by M/s. Finacord Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. and purchased by the appellants herein from whose premises the goods were seized are liable to confiscation under Section 111(d) and (m) of the Customs Act, 1962 appropriating a sum of Rs. 1,56,64,500/- paid by the appellants in compliance with the order of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court as a condition for release and utilization of the goods by the appellants, towards differential duty recoverable under Section 125(2) and also appropriating a sum of Rs. 51,62,413/- towards the value of the goods, which would have been leviable as redemption fine, if the goods had been available for confiscation.2. We have heard both sides. The appellants challenge the liability to confiscation of goods. We note that the confiscation of the goods under Section 111(m) has alread...
Emerson Network Power (i) P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-15-2005
Reported in: (2007)10STT92
1. After hearing both sides for sometime on the application for waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax of Rs. 62,05,600/- and penalties of equal amount under Section 78, Rs. 500/- under Section 75A, Rs. 200/- per day under Section 76 and Rs. 1000/- under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 we find that it is possible to decide the appeal itself at this stage and hence proceed to do so after waiving pre-deposit with the consent of both sides.2. Service Tax demand has been confirmed on the ground that they were carrying out after sales service such as installation, commissioning, erection and further maintenance of equipment on their customers' premises and were hence liable to pay Service Tax as Consulting Engineers. Against the demand confirmation and penalty imposed, appeal was preferred to the Commissioner (Appeals) who passed order in terms of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act and directed pre-deposit of 50% of the duty and penalty. For failure to comply with this direction he di...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »