Mumbai Court November 2006 Judgments

Alice Elizabeth D'Souza and Anr. Vs. Motor Vessel Magalam and Ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(1)ALLMR599; 2006(6)BomCR476

Deshmukh D.K., J.1. The plaintiffs seek a decree in the amount of Rs. 45,60,000/- (Rupees Forty Five lakhs Sixty thousand only) with interest. The facts that are relevant are that the plaintiffs are the widow and the son of Mr. Edwin D'Souza who expired on 13th September, 1999. The defendant No. 1 is a vessel flying the Indian flag of which the defendant No. 2 is the owner. The defendant No. 3 is the agent of defendant No. 2 and has been acting for and on behalf of defendant No. 2 particularly in respect of employment of personnel on the motor vessels of defendant No. 2. According to the plaintiffs, at the time of his death deceased Edwin D'Souza was employed by the defendant No. 2 as Chief Engineer of defendant No. 1 vessel. According to the plaintiffs, while on duty he suffered heart attack and due to lack of proper care expired on 13.9.1999. According to the plaintiff, the deceased was a member of the Maritime Union of India which is an organisation representing the member/officers ...

Ashok Organics Industries Ltd. Vs. Dena Bank and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2007]135CompCas203(Bom)

S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.1. By this petition filed under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, the petitioners prays that the arrangement embodied in the scheme (annexure J) be sanctioned by this Court with or without modification and declare the same as binding on the petitioner and its secured and unsecured creditors.2. The petition is presented to this Court on January 9, 2006. The petitioner has pointed out that it was incorporated on February 13, 1973, in the name and style of Ashoka Organics Industries Ltd. The registered office of the petitioner-company is situate at 14, Sun Mill Compound, Sun Industrial Co-operative Society Ltd., Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013. The authorised share capital of the company is Rs. 15,00,00,000 divided into 1,50,000 equity shares of Rs. 10 each. The issued, subscribed and paid up capital of the company is Rs. 12,08,56,250 divided into 1,20,85,625 equity shares of Rs. 10 each fully paid up.3. The main object of the company are set out in paras. ...

Ashok Tapiram Patil @ A.T. Nana Patil Vs. Gurumukh Mehrumal Jagwani an ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(1)ALLMR355; 2006(6)BomCR832

Gaikwad M.G., J.1. Heard learned Counsel, appearing for the respective parties.2. By this petition under Section 80 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, petitioner challenges the election of respondent No. 1 as a Member of Maharashtra Legislative Council from Jalgaon Local Authorities Constituency, Jalgaon.3. The brief details of the election are as follows.[a] Election programme declared 10-11-2004[b] Date of filing nominations 11-11-2004[c] Date of Polling 30-11-2004[d] Declaration of result 2-12-2004[e] Date of filing of Election 17-1-2005Petition [f] Date of filing of affidavit 19-1-2005in Form No. 25The petitioner was nominated as a candidate put up by Nationalist Congress Party whereas the respondent No. 1 contested the election as an independent candidate. The election being an election from Jalgaon Local Authorities Constituency, the members of Panchayat Samitis, ZillaParishads, Municipal Councils in Jalgaon District were the valid voters. There was alliance between I...

Brown Kraft Inds. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Heard both sides. This is an appeal filed by the assessee i.e. M/s.Brown Kraft Industries Ltd. 58/159, Achhad Industrial Estate, Achhad Taluka Talasari aggrieved by an order dated 4-8-05 passed by the Commissioner, Central Excise (Appeals) Mumbai-IV who in turn has upheld the Order in Original dated 30-8-04.2. The facts of the case are that the Appellants are the manufacturers of corrugated boxes/tubes falling under Chapter Heading No. 48.19 of CETA, 1985. They were not reversing the excess modvat/cenvat credit availed on the raw materials because of trade discounts passed on by their supplier at later stage. It is alleged by the department that after giving discount the transaction value changed, and resulted in payment of reduced duty. This amounted to excess credit passed on to the appellant to the extent of differential duty calculated on the discount amount. The department further alleged that the appellants raised debit notes to the suppliers and suppressed the same with inte...

Rose Travels Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Acc)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. We have heard both sides on the applications for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty of Rs. 50,000/- imposed on each of the applicants under the provisions of Section 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the ground that they abetted smuggling of foreign currency out of India by one Shri Essack Farid Shaikh who was intercepted on 21-9-1997 at Sahar Airport, Mumbai, and from whom travellers cheques issued by both the applicants herein who are Full-fledged Money Changers, were recovered. The Commissioner's finding in respect of imposition of penalty on M/s. Wall Street Finance Ltd. is to be found in Paragraph 2.19 of the impugned order, while the finding on penalty upon M/s. Rose Travels is found in Paragraph 2.20 of the impugned order. The Commissioner has found that out of four persons in whose names TCs worth US$ 10,500 were issued by Rose Travels (which was found on the person of Essack Farid Shaikh), two could not be traced as their addresses were found to be fictitious. The third per...

Govind Sharma Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)(213)ELT585Tri(Mum.)bai

2. Appeal No. C/425/06 along with Stay Petition has been filed by Shri Bhagwan Sippy. The ld. Counsel for this appellant submitted that Shri Bhagwan Sippy is an employee of CHA. The appeal filed by this appellant is for setting aside penalty amount Rs. 3 lacs imposed by the Commissioner.3. Similarly Appeal No. C/431/2006 alongwith Stay Petition has been filed by Shri Mukesh Bhanushali against imposition of penalty of Rs. 3 lacs on him by Commissioner under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962.The appeal filed by this appellant is for setting aside penalty amount of Rs. 3 lacs imposed by the Commissioner.4. Appeal No. C-429/06 alongwith Stay Petition has been filed by Shri Jayesh Gala against the imposition of penalty of Rs. 10 lacs under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962.5. Appeal No. 430/06 alongwith Stay Petition has been filed by Shri Govind Sharma against the imposition of penalty of Rs. 10 lacs under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962.6. As regards the appeal of Shri Bhagwan...

Ganesh Tukaram Lonkar Vs. Vinayak Deorao Bhore and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(1)ALLMR235; 2007(1)BomCR652

B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. Writ Petition 1736 of 1996 is filed by landlord Shri Ganesh while Writ Petition 1933 of 1996 is filed by tenant Shri Vinayak. The parties will be referred to as landlord or tenant to avoid confusion. Landlord filed two proceedings or cases contending that tenant is in arrears of rent and habitual defaulter for two different periods. The Rent Controller functioning under C.P. and Berar Rent Control Order,1949 (hereinafter referred as Rent Control Order), granted permission only under Clause 13 (3) (i) finding tenant to be in arrears of rent in both matters. The permission sought for under Clause 13 (3) (ii) on the ground of habitual default was rejected in both cases. Against this common Order dated 31st March 1994 both landlord and tenant filed their respective appeals before Additional Collector, Akola which is appellate authority under Clause 21 of Rent Control Order. Thus there were total four appeals before Appellate Authority and on 29/1/1996 by common Ord...

A.S. Krishnamurthy and ors. Vs. Central India Spinning, Weaving and Ma ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(1)ALLMR601; 2007(2)BomCR147

B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. Petitioners before this Court have challenged the order passed by Member, Industrial Court dated 16th Oct. 1995 below exhibit 28 in Reference (ICN) 4/1978, holding that the Petitioners have no legal right or locus standi to appear & prosecute said Reference. Said reference has been made by appropriate government i.e. state government at the instance of respondent No. 4, a representative trade union under provisions of Bombay Industrial Relations Act, hereinafter referred to as B.I.R. Act. Respondent No. 2 before this Court is the Employer (successor of earlier employer company) while respondent No. 1 was its earlier holding company. Member, Industrial Court has been joined by name as respondent No. 3 because of some allegations made against him in the matter.2. It is not in dispute that the present Petitioners were working in Empress Mills Retail Sales Division since when it was managed by respondent No. 1 and after its nationalization, came under present respo...

Municipal Council Vs. Shriram Saw Mill

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(1)ALLMR170; 2007(1)BomCR74

B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. Municipal Council, Achalpur has filed present petition with request to treat it as Petition in representative capacity in 74 Appeals which are preferred against it by various Occupiers or Allottees of plots in its Bazaar with further direction to all Appellants to deposit entire amount demanded by notices by it as precondition to proceed with the Appeals. Prayer is also made to quash and set aside ex-parte interim stay order dated 4/6/2003 passed by learned J.M.F.C. Achalpur in Appeal No. 54/2002 and other similar Appeals. All these Appeals are filed under Section 169 read with Section 171 of Maharashtra Municipal Council, Nagar Panchayat and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (hereinafter mentioned as Municipal Act). Considering the nature of controversy, I have heard parties at length at the stage of admission itself. Rule is thus made returnable forthwith. 2. Municipal Council is local authority constituted under the provisions of Municipal Act to look after mun...

Shri Jagannath Pandharinath Rewaskar and Ors. Vs. the Hon'ble Minister ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(1)ALLMR183; 2007(2)BomCR124; 2007(1)MhLj771

B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. The Petitioners are challenging order dated 6/6/2006 passed by respondent No. 1 Hon'ble Minister permitting amendment to the bye law of respondent No. 4 Society and subsequent order dated 7/6/2006 passed by respondent No. 5 Election Officer staying the election programme until further orders or till declaration of fresh election programme according to amended bye-laws. This Court on 20/6/2006 while issuing notice indicated to parties that petition would be disposed off at admission stage. On that day this Court also granted ad-interim relief and directed maintenance of status quo as on that day. It appears that respondent No 5, practicing advocate misinterpreted this interim order as permitting him to proceed further and hence, grievance was made in that respect before this Court. On 27/6/2006 this Court passed order on CA 3708/2006 and only because the learned AGP communicated about resignation tendered by Election Officer, though this Court found course adopt...