Mumbai Court February 2006 Judgments

Atchut Upendra Raikar Vs. Surya Upendra Raikar (Since Deceased) Throug ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)BomCR830

Khandeparkar R.M.S., J.1. Heard the Advocates for the petitioner and respondents No. 1(a) to 1(f) and 2, 3 and 4. Neither the respondents No. 5 to 10 are present nor anyone to represent them. Notice was issued for final disposal of the petition at the admission stage. Failure on the part of the respondents No. 5 to 10 to appear before the Court, apparently discloses that they are not interested in contesting the proceedings.2. The petitioner challenges the Order dated 15th December, 2004 passed by the Civil Judge S.D., Margao in Special Civil Suit No. 74/1999/III. By the impugned order the trial Court has dismissed the applications for setting aside of abatement, condonation of delay in bringing the L.Rs. as well as the application for bringing the L.Rs. on record consequent to the death of defendant No. 5 in the suit. The applications have been dismissed on the ground that the petitioner has not been able to show sufficient cause for not filing the application for bringing the L.Rs. o...

Jagdish Vs. Shobha

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2(2006)DMC307

R.C. Chavan, J.1. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicant challenges the order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhandara in Criminal Revision No. 49/1997, directing the applicant to pay maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs. 400 per month to the non-applicant.2. The facts, which gave rise to the present proceeding are as under:Non-applicant Shobha Nandeshwar claims to have been married to applicant Jagdish after she had carried the applicant's child in her womb. Since, the applicant neglected and failed to maintain her, in spite of the fact that he owns four acres land and also earns Rs. 50 per day from agricultural labour, the said Shobha filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sakoli. She claimed maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs. 500 per month from applicant Jagdish. 3. Jagdish filed reply, denying that Shobha was married to him as ...

Maria Sonia Elvira Vs. Nicolau Lourenco Serverino Pereira and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR358; 2006(5)BomCR348

Khandeparkar R.M.S., J.1. Rule. By consent, the rule is made returnable forthwith.2. The petitioner challenges the Order dated 14th July, 2004 to the extent the trial Court rejected the application seeking leave to rely upon the report prepared by one Sitakant Kamat, Surveyor.3. Upon hearing the learned Advocates for the parties and on perusal of records, it is seen that undoubtedly, the petitioner was seeking to rely upon the plan and the report prepared by Sitakant Kamat, a copy of which was furnished to the order side. Being so, the impugned order refusing to rely upon the plan and the report prepared by Sitakant kamat solely on the ground that the said report and the plan was not in existence, cannot be sustained, Apparently, the report sought to be relied upon discloses alleged inspection of site on 9-5-2004 and the application was filed on 28-6-2004. Merely because the petitioner had stated in the application that such a report had not come into possession of the petitioner that ...

Laxmi Anant Pednekar Vs. Government of Goa and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR320; 2006(5)BomCR366

Khandeparkar R.M.S., J.1. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Rule. By consent, the rule is made returnable forthwith.2. The petitioner challenges the judgment and order dated 7th January, 2005 passed by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Goa, in Co-operative Revision No. 4/2002/ of existence of employer employee relationship RCS- Though the impugned order is sought to be challenged on various grounds, it is not necessary to deal with all those grounds suffice to refer only one ground sought to be raised with reference to Section 100-A of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 as applicable to the State of Goa (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act.').3. It is the contention of the petitioner that though it was sought to be claimed by the respondent-society that father of the petitioner had borrowed certain amount, undisputedly the father expired in the year 1993, the proceedings under Section 100-A of the said Act were initiated in the year 1998, much after...

Sharad H. Lotlikar Vs. Government of Goa and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR360; 2006(5)BomCR378

Khandeparkar R.M.S., J.1. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Rule. By consent, the rule is made returnable forthwith.2. The petitioner challenges the judgment and order dated 8th October, 2004 passed by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Goa, in Co-operative Revision No. 3/2002/RCS. Though the impugned order is sought to be challenged on various grounds, it is not necessary to deal with all those grounds and suffice to refer only one ground viz. the point relating to the failure on the part of the authority to comply with the basic requirement of the principles of natural justice and the rules of procedure before deciding any issue i.e. Failure on the part of the authority to issue notices to the concerned parties and secondly non consideration of the issue of limitation.3. Upon hearing the learned Advocates for the parties and on perusal of the records, it is seen that though the petitioner was undisputedly stated to have been a Loanee in this matter, before proceeding...

Stp Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (i)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Heard both sides, in this appeal filed by importer. The core issue involved is the question of classification of 10,000/- metres of 'Elotene W 3000'. The applicants seek to classify the goods under heading 3919.90 while the goods were found to be self adhesive bitumen/asphalt membrane protected with film used for water proofing of surfaces. Therefore they were proposed a different classification under heading 6807.10 by the lower authorities. Duty demands and penalty was therefore confirmed.2. On verification of the catalogue, it is found that it specifies the total thickness of film as 1.5 mm, the bituminous compound constituting 1.4 mm and the film on which it is coated is 0.1 mm of thickness.Applying the pre-dominant composition test for classification of a product, the goods are held to be appropriately classifiable under heading 6807. The plea for classification under chapter of plastics, as plastic film is not upheld. The confiscation considering the ITC Policy under 6807 is ...

Bento De Souza Egypsy (Dr.) and ors. Vs. Yvetter Alvares Colaco Alias ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(3)ALLMR195; 2006(2)BomCR465

Britto N.A., J.1. The question for our consideration in this defendant's Letters Patent Appeal is whether the agreement dated 29-3-1968 between the parties, styled as a deed of leave and license had necessarily to be construed as a lease in the light of the provision of Article 3 of the Law of Leases, namely Decree No. 43525 dated 7-3-1961 (decree, for short) in force in the State of Goa with effect from 7-3-1961?2. The parties hereto shall be referred to in the names as they appear in cause title of the civil suit.3. Some facts are required to be stated to dispose of this appeal.4. There is no, dispute that the plaintiffs are the owners of a building bearing No. 143 situated at Monsignor Ganganelli Road in Margao in which late Dr. Luis dos Santos Alvares (the plaintiffs are his successors) was running a hospital known as Casa de Saude from the year 1926 or thereabout and different surgeons performed operations/ surgery at the said Casa de Saude. Dr. Bento de Souza Egypsy of Calangute ...

Diocesan Society of Education and ors. Vs. University of Goa and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(3)ALLMR203; 2006(2)BomCR472

Britto N.A., J.1. The Petitioner No. 3 was the Principal of the Petitioner No. 2- college, run by Petitioner No. 1- Society. In this Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of India, the Petitioners, inter alia, assail the action of withholding of consent by respondent No. 2- State of Goa by their letter No. 9/12/97-HE dated 3-5-2000 and consequently the non-payment of the salary of the Petitioner No. 3 for the period from 1-7-2001 to 31-5-2002 and that oi respondent No. 1 University, in withdrawing the consent earlier given by their letter No. GU/B/XVR/12-1/2001/2796 dated 3-9-2001, for the re-appointment of Petitioner No. 1 Principal.2. Some more facts are requires to be stated to dispose of the present Petition.3. The Petitioner No. 3, was appointed as a Principal by the other Petitioners on 20-6-1991 and he was to attain the age of superannuation i.e. 60 years on 5-3-2000. As the other Petitioners desired to re-employ the Petitioner No. 3 well prior to his att...

P.C. Joshi Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)202CTR(Bom)57; [2006]282ITR39(Bom)

1. This petition filed by an advocate, who is a senior tax practitioner, seeks a declaration that the National Tax Tribunal Act, 2005 is bad in law and seeks to restrain respondents Nos. 1 to 3 from taking any steps in pursuance thereof. The petition invokes Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 50 amongst other submissions. Respondents No. 1 to 3 are the Union of India through Secretary (Finance), Ministry of Law and Justice and Ministry of Finance.2. We have heard Mr. Dastur, senior advocate, in support of this petition and Mr. B. A. Desai, Additional Solicitor General for respondents No. 1 to 3.3. This National Tax Tribunal Act, which is to come into force on December 20, 2005, seeks to create a National Tax Tribunal in pursuance of Article 323B of the Constitution of India to deal with the disputes in respect of levy, assessment collection and enforcement of direct taxes as well as to provide for adjudication by that Tribunal of disputes with respect to determination of rates of customs duties...

Lakhanlal S/O Brijlal Purohit and ors. Vs. Marwadi Samshan Hanuman Man ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(3)ALLMR524; 2006(4)BomCR827; 2006(2)MhLj479

S.A. Bobde, J.1. This Civil Revision Application is directed against the order dated 22-6-1998 rejecting the applicants' application under Section 9-A of the Code of Civil Procedure. The applicants had objected to the tenability of the suit filed against them by the Trustee of the respondent-Trust on two grounds, firstly, that it is not tenable in the absence of permission of the Charity Commissioner under Section 50 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, and secondly on the ground that Section 80 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act bars the jurisdiction of a Civil Court.2. The non-applicant/respondent is the President of Public Trust known as Marwadi Samshan Hanuman Mandir, Akot. As is the usual erroneous practice in such matters, the respondent has filed the suit in the name of the Trust i.e. Marwadi Samshan Hanuman Mandir, Akot through himself i.e. the Trustee, as if a Trust is an independent legal entity. The practice ignores the position in law that a Trust is an obligation annexed to a pro...