Mumbai Court December 2006 Judgments

Narendra Voikunt Raikar Vs. Amaral Pereira

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(3)ALLMR222; 2007(2)BomCR99; 2007(3)MhLj252

P.V. Kakade, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for both the parties. Perused the record.2. The unsuccessful defendant has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order passed by the Additional District Judge, Margao dismissing his appeal and confirming the judgment and order passed by the Civil Court dated 30-9-1997 decreeing the plaintiffs suit for declaration and perpetual injunction as a consequential relief. Further, it was also directed by the trial Court that the Collector, on the basis of order passed by the Court, should make necessary changes in the Survey Record.3. The plaintiff came with the case that the suit mill with an area of 134 sq. metres was taken over for consideration by one Smt. Maria Francisca Fernandes, his grand-mother, in the name of one Shaba Bojru Naik Bogat from Shri Madev Kane, somewhere in the year 1933. After the death of said Maria Fernandes, the same was transferred in the name of her elder daughter, Dumetilda Fernandes in the year 1970, then in the na...

State of Maharashtra Vs. Harunbeg and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: II(2007)DMC382

C.L. Pangarkar, J.1. The respondents were acquitted by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha of the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The State of Maharashtra, therefore, has preferred this appeal. The respondents shall hereinafter be referred to as the accused.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are as under:Khairunissa - the deceased was married to accused No. 1 - Harunbeg. She has two children. She was living with accused Nos. 1,2 and 3 at village Ashti. One Tarannum Parveen the daughter of sister of the deceased was also living with the deceased on the date of the incident. On the date of the incident, accused No. l had gone to Talegaon to buy eggs. Since he did not get eggs, he came back home. After taking meals he went to the field. The complainant Tarannum Parveen, who was then aged 7 years also had her lunch with accused No. 1. After accused No. 1 went to the field, the accused No. 2 asked the deceased as to why she had prepared an...

Mahindra and Mahindra Employees' Union and Ors. Vs. Commissioner of La ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)IILLJ858Bom

D.D. Sinha, J.1. Rule Returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of Shri Thakur, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Shri Mandpe, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4, Shri Puranik, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 5, and Shri Gordey, learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 6 to 8.2. The petition is directed against the order dated April 29, 2006 passed by the Labour Officer whereby requisition dated April 4, 2006 moved by 384 employees for recalling the elected representatives came to be rejected on the ground that the reasons given in the requisition were unjustified.3. Shri Thakur, learned Counsel for the petitioners, submitted that in the instant case, it is not in dispute that there is no representative Union in respect of respondent No. 5 Engineering Industry and therefore, employees were entitled to elect five persons from amongst themselves to represent them for the purpose of provisions of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 (her...

Hindustan Lever Limited Vs. Hindustan Lever Employees' Union and Ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(2)BomCR102

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. An award of the Industrial Tribunal in a wage reference forms the subject matter of the proceedings. Both the employer -Hindustan Lever Limited (HLL) - and the Unions are dissatisfied with material segments of the award. The proceedings before the Court involve a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by the employer and two petitions by the Unions. Submissions have been heard on behalf of the employer and on behalf of the Unions up on the challenge instituted before the Court in all the petitions to getherand this judgment would accordingly dispose of those petitions.Essentially, the question that arises for determination before the Court is whether the Industrial Tribunal has failed to exercise its jurisdiction consistent with the principles of law that must govern wage adjudication. This Court, while accepting the gravamen of the challenges to the award has arrived at the conclusion that the Industrial Tribunal has manifestly failed to apply the settle...

Major Anurag Pathak Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(3)ALLMR228

B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. The petitioner was a Company Commander at Bhatinda, Punjab in 236 Engineer Regiment in the years 1991-93 and his Confidential Reports during the said period showed him to be an Officer of integrity, efficiency and reliability. He was assigned foreign posting at Bhutan in the Border Road Organisation, Project Dantak on independent command as an Officer Commanding 60 Road Construction Company under 19 BRTF (Border Road Task Force) from 1993-96. After this assignment the petitioner came to be posted as an Instructor in the Faculty of Civil Engineering in the college of Military Engineering at Pune and in March 1998 he was called upon to record the summary of evidence of an enquiry. On reaching Bhutan he was orally informed that on some payment vouchers, his thumb impression was found superimposed on the thumb impression of the casual labourer to whom payment was made during his tenure at Bhutan during 1993-96. He submitted an explanation and his summary of evidence c...

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sunanda Wd/O Ramesh Dhumone and or ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: II(2007)ACC565; 2007ACJ1715; 2007(3)ALLMR141; 2007(3)MhLj256

A.P. Lavande, J.1. Heard Mr. D.N. Kukday, Advocate for the Appellant and Mr. A.R. Wagh, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 5. Admit. By consent heard forthwith.2. By this appeal, the appellant assails the judgment and order dated 10-8-2005 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Wardha in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 114/2004 partly allowing the application filed by the respondents under Section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 3,29,500/-inclusive of no fault liability with interest thereon @ 9% per annum from the date of the petition.3. In nutshell, the facts which are relevant for disposal of this appeal are as follows:The respondents are the legal representatives of Ramesh Dhumone who died in the vehicular accident which occurred on 1-12-2003. On that day at about 19.15 hours the deceased was returning on his motorcycle with his brother Ganesh. The deceased could not see the road properly on acco...

Exemplar Nihon Spindle Mfg. Co. P. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)8STR538

1. This appeal is against the Order-in-Revision passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Nasik, vide her Order No.99/NSK/06 dated 1-8-2006.3. The Assistant Commissioner vide his Order-in-Original No. 224/2004 dated 20-8-2004 confirmed Service tax demand amounting to Rs. 27,568/- and interest Rs. 10,495/-. He also imposed a penalty of Rs. 100/- under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994.4. The Commissioner initiated review proceedings in terms of Section 84 of the Finance Act, 1994 on the ground that penalty imposed was lower than the prescribed minimum penalty and enhanced the penalty to Rs. 26,800/-. There is no dispute about the Service tax payable or interest demand. The dispute relates to interpretation of Section 76, which reads as follows: Penalty for failure to collect or pay Service tax. - Any person, liable to pay Service tax in accordance with the provisions of Section 68 or the rules made thereunder, who fails to pay such tax shall pay in addition to payin...

PravIn R. Malpani Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)9STT200

1. In the instant appeal, assessee has failed to pay the service tax and to file Return for the period October 1998 to March 2001 on or before stipulated period. The Assistant Commissioner, Service Tax, Central Excise and Customs, Nashik-IV Division issued the Show Cause Notice and adjudicated the same confirming the service tax and interest amount thereon and appropriated the same since the assessee has paid said amount prior to issuance of show cause notice. Further ne has imposed penalty of Rs. 2000/- under Section 76 and Rs. 1000/- under Section 77 of the service tax Act. The assessee had also paid these penalties.2. The aforesaid order has been passed under Section 84 of the Finance Act by the Commissioner, Central Excise and Customs, Nashik and enhanced the penalty amount imposed under Section 76 of the Act to the Tune of Rs. 29,863/- under his revisional power. Hence this appeal filed by the assessee disputing the enhanced penalty amount.3. Main contention of the appeal is that...

Malyil James Anthony Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. In the instant appeal, assessee has failed to pay the service tax and to file Return for the period October 1998 to March 2003 on or before stipulated period. The Assistant Commissioner, Service Tax, Central Excise and Custcms, Nashik-IV Division issued the Show Cause Notice and adjudicated the same confirming the service tax and interest amount thereon and appropriated the same since the assessee has paid said amount prior to issuance of show cause notice. Further he has imposed penalty of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 76 and Rs. 1000/- under Section 77 of the service tax Act. The assessee had also paid these penalties.2. The aforesaid order has been passed under Section 84 of the Finance Act by the Commissioner, Central Excise and Customs, Nashik and enhanced the penalty amount imposed under Section 76 of the Act to the Tune of Rs. 1,81,467/- under his revisional power. Hence this appeal filed by the assessee disputing the enhanced penalty amount.3. Main contention of the appeal is ...

Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. Ankit Pulps and Boards Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Heard both sides on stay petition. After hearing for sometime, it was felt possible to decide the appeal itself and with the consent of both sides we proceed to do so.2. This is an appeal by the department against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) vide No. SVS/229/NGP-ICD/2006 dated 20-7-2006.3. The respondent imported goods declared as "Stock Lot Bleached Hardwood Fluff and Softwood pulp" and filed Bill of Entry accordingly.During examination, the goods were found to be other than declared and consisted of goods such as Non-wovens, Non-woven fabric, Non-woven fabric Grade 256, Retainer cloth etc. The Wood Pulp falling under Chapter sub-heading 4702.00.00 is assessable to Customs duty @ 5% ad valorem (BCD) and 2% Education Cess. Whereas the imported goods are assessable @ 15% ad valorem (BCD) and 16% CVD, Cess @ 2% and Educational Cess @ 2%.4. During the course of investigation and before issue of show cause notice by their letter dated 7-2-2006, the respondents intimated tha...