Mumbai Court November 2006 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.
Ashok Udaram Pathrabe Vs. Maharashtra Remote Sensing Application Centr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-29-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ALLMR717; 2007(1)MhLj519
V.C. Daga, J.1. This petition is directed against the order dated 8th May, 2000 passed by the respondent No. 3 and the order dated 1st June, 2001 passed by the respondent No. 1; communicated to the petitioner vide letters dated 11th February, 2002 and 11th September, 2002; whereby the petitioner came to be dismissed from service after departmental enquiry. The Facts2. The facts giving rise to the filing of this petition are as under:3. The petitioner was working as Accounts Officer with the Maharashtra Remote Sensing Application Centre, Nagpur (the ' MRSAC' for short); which is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act. It receives grant from the State Government. It has to function as per the policy of the State Government.4. It has framed its own bye-laws and service rules known as the 'Service Rules and Procedure' for the Personnel and Administrative affairs. The post of Accounts Officer in the pay-scale of Rs. 2000-3500 was created from 3-11-1992 with due approval f...
Vatsala Premchand Sarmal Vs. Raghunath Damodar Krachale and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-29-2006
Reported in: 2007(4)BomCR375; 2007(1)MhLj705
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. The first respondent joined the services of the Hazarimal Somani College of Commerce and Economics as a Senior Clerk in the Accounts Department in the month of April, 1971. In 1976, he was discharging the duties of an Accountant. On 2nd October, 1981, a charge-sheet was issued to the first respondent. The articles of charge were thus:(i) During 1976-1977 the first respondent had allegedly collected a sum of Rs. 4785/- from 383 students of the Junior College by charging fees for preparatory classes which were not shown in the accounts of the College;(ii) During 1978-79 when the first respondent was in charge of accounts both for the Degree and Junior College one Professor Verghese was appointed as a lecturer upto 31st March, 1979 after which date, the aforesaid teacher did not attend the College. The first respondent had allegedly drawn the salary of the aforesaid teacher in the pay-sheets between April and August, 1979 which was credited to the account of the tea...
Shaikh Sikandar Sk. Haidar and ors. Vs. Saraswati Education Society an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-29-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ALLMR836; 2007(4)BomCR387; 2007(4)MhLj185
A.H. Joshi, J.1. The respondent No. 1 is a Public Trust which owns Agricultural Land Survey No. 50 (Gat No. 197), admeasuring 32 acres and 35 Gunthas, and Land Survey No. 49 (Gat No. 196), admeasuring 20 acres and 36 Gunthas at village Gaigaon, Taluka - Balapur, District - Akola amongst other properties. This land is hereinafter referred, for brevity, as 'suit land.'2. It was not possible for the Trust to manage the property, and to earn income from the agricultural lands. At the same time, the Trust was in need of funds for developing a plot in its possession by raising a hostel for students of Polytechnic College run by it, to carry out repairs to the college building, in order to upgrade the building to the requirements laid down by the Indian Council of Technical Education, and all this needed raising of funds.3. Due to these financial compulsions, the respondent No. 1 resolved in its meeting dated 5th January, 1994 to sell some of its immovable properties, and for this purpose, ga...
Golden Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Mohamad Azam Dil Mohamad Malik and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-29-2006
Reported in: [2007(113)FLR377]
Nishita Mhatre, J.1. Mr. Yadav, Advocate appearing for the workman, states that the respondent-workman has taken away the papers from him and therefore, he is unable to assist the Court. Since his appearance continues in the matter, the matter is proceeded with.The petition has been preferred against Award Part II of the I Labour Court at Thane in Reference (IDA) No. 46 of 1987. The Labour Court has allowed the reference partly. The respondent-workman has been reinstated by his award with 50% back wages.2. A charge-sheet was issued against the respondent-workman on 25.12.1985 who was then working as a helper. The charges levelled against the workman included those under clauses 29(1), (11) and (12) of the Standing Orders applicable. In essence, the charge levelled against the respondent was that he was found sleeping on duty by the Security Supervisor. When he awoke the workman and asked for his card, the respondent-workman abused him indecently and indulged in exhibitionism. Filthy an...
Pune Cantonment Board Vs. Regional Labour Commissioner and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)ALLMR166; [2007(114)FLR989]; (2007)IILLJ609Bom; 2007(1)MhLj458
Nishita Mhatre, J.1. The issue which arises in this writ petition is whether the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 is applicable to the Pune Cantonment Board and whether it is bound to pay gratuity under that Act. The petitioners contend that they are covered by the Central Civil Services Rules and, therefore, the Payment of Gratuity Act is not applicable to their establishment. According to the petitioners, the respondent employees have exercised their option to claim the retiral benefits under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972. Despite such an option having been exercised by the employees, they filed applications under Section 4 of the Payment of Gratuity Act claiming gratuity. The Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, allowed the applications. The appeals preferred by the Cantonment Board Pune have been dismissed. Hence the present writ petition.2. In the case of Poona Cantonment Board v. S.K. Das and Ors. reported in 1993 (2) CLR 731, this Court has he...
Poona Shims Pvt. Ltd. Vs. B.P. Ramaiah, Regional Provident Fund Commis ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)BomCR981; [2007(112)FLR1196]; (2007)IILLJ620Bom; 2007(1)MhLj463
Nishita Mhatre, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the order of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner passed under Section 14-B of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). This order dated 30-6-1995 requires the petitioner to pay damages amounting to Rs. 5,47,911/- for delay in making the payment of contributions towards the Provident Fund Scheme.2. The petitioner was established as a new unit and started its commercial and production activities on 1-7-1981. It had an employees' strength of 50. The petitioner was entitled to the infancy protection of 5 years available to a new establishment under the provisions of the Act. An application was made by the petitioner on 25-2-1984 for voluntary coverage of their establishment under Section 1(4) of the Act. The respondent Commissioner directed the petitioner by letter dated 16-4-1984 to submit certain additional documents and further information. The petitioner supplied ...
Maratha Samaj Seva Mandal and anr. Vs. Mrs. Rajani Rajan Dixit and ors ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)BomCR198; 2007(1)MhLj544
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard. The petitioners challenge judgment and order dated 6th October, 1993 passed by the School Tribunal in Appeal No. 61 of 1992 whereby the respondent No. 1 has been declared as Full Time Teacher in respect of Chhatrapati Shivaji Night Junior College of Arts and Commerce, Solapur.2. While challenging the impugned order the learned advocate for the petitioners has drawn my attention to clause 54.3 of the Secondary Schools Code and relying upon an unreported decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the matter of Maratha Samaj Seva Mandal, Solapur and Anr. v. Madhukar Sadashiv Vyawahare and Ors. in Writ Petition No. 467 of 1993 delivered on 24th March, 2006, submitted that in case of Night Junior Colleges, the classes are required to be conducted only for two and a half hours duration and therefore the teachers appointed in such colleges are not entitled for declaration as Full Time Teachers or on regular pay scale meant for full time teachers, and, the...
Kapila Dairy Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Rajendra Balasaheb Kulkarni and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-2006
Reported in: IV(2007)BC214
M.G. Gaikwad, J.1. Heard learned Advocates for respective parties.2. By preferring these applications original complainant seeks leave to prefer appeal against the judgment of acquittal recorded in S.T.C.C. Nos. 996/99, 997/99 and 1000/99. The applicant had filed above referred 3 complaints alleging offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.In S.T.C. Case No. 996/99 the allegations made by the complainant are that cheque dated 30.9.98 for Rs. 35,090/- came to be dishonoured and payment of that cheque amount was not made, in spite of demand notice.In S.T.C. Case No. 997/99, accused was alleged to have issued cheque dated 4.10.1998 for Rs. 34,100/-. It was dishonoured and intimation dated 5.10.1998 was given to the complainant. Demand of that amount was made but it was not satisfied, so alleging offence under Section 138 of the Act, second complaint came to be filed.In S.T.C. Case No. 1000/99 complainant alleged offence on account of dishonour of cheque dated 1.10.1998 for ...
Jai Nadershah Karani and anr. Vs. C.M. Betgeri, Commissioner of Income ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-27-2006
Reported in: (2007)208CTR(Bom)287; [2007]290ITR594(Bom)
H.L. Gokhale, J.1. Heard Mr. J.D. Mistri for the petitioners, Mr. Asokan appears for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. Murlidharan appears for respondent No. 5.2. This writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks to challenge the order dt. 28th Jan., 1993, directing compulsory purchase of the property owned by the petitioners by passing necessary order under Chapter XX-C of the IT Act, 1961.3. The short facts leading to this petition are as follows:The petitioners were the owners of flat No. 11-A of carpet area of 875 sq. ft. situated on the 11th floor of a building known as 'Diamond Court' situated at 40, Laxmibai Jagmohandas Marg (formerly known as 'Nepean Sea Road'). The petitioners entered into an agreement of sale with the respondent No. 5 herein on 3rd Nov., 1992. As per the terms of that agreement, the petitioners were to receive Rs. 5,00,000 as earnest money and the remaining amount of Rs. 70,00,000 within 30 days after the NOC was issued by the appropr...
il and Fs Investment Managers Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-27-2006
Reported in: (2007)209CTR(Bom)1; [2008]298ITR32(Bom)
ORDERH.L. Gokhale, J.1. The petitioner herein is an asset management company which claims to manage private institutional funds of Indian and foreign investors for investments in India. The petitioner entered into an agreement dt. 12th April, 2002 with its sister-concern named Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Ltd. ('IL & FS' for short), by which it agreed to purchase the business of managing private equity funds and venture capital funds and providing financial services for a lump sum consideration of Rs. 14.15 crores. Under the said agreement, it purchased various intangible assets of IL & FS such as intellectual property, including but not limited to know-how, copyrights, computer software, technical data, franchises, etc. Later on the consideration payable was reduced to Rs. 11.50 crores by a subsequent agreement.2. The petitioner filed a return of its income for the asst. yr. 2003-04 wherein it claimed depreciation of Rs. 3,05,77,001. The petitioner later on received an ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »