Mumbai Court February 2006 Judgments

Union of India (Uoi) Through General Manager, Parel C.S.T. Central Rai ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(3)BomCR94; [2006(109)FLR743]; (2006)IIILLJ369Bom; 2006(3)MhLj290

Nishita Mhatre, J.1. The Petitioners, Union of India, have challenged the Order dated 4th April 2003 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai Bench in Original Application No. 159 of 1993. The Tribunal has allowed the Original Application by directing that terminal benefits, like gratuity, family pension, cash equivalent of earned leave, provident fund, arrears of salary, etc. be paid over to the legal heirs of Ramnayan Verma who was employed with the Central Railway. Ramnayan Verma (hereinafter referred to as 'the employee') expired on 20th November 1992.2. It is the case of the Petitioners that Ramnayan Verma, who was working as a Steam Crane Driver in the Central Railway Workshop at Parel, had assaulted the Senior Shop Superintendent causing serious injuries to him. The employee was placed under suspension on 11th February 1992. The fact finding committee appointed by the Railways submitted its report on 14th February 1992. Several workers had admitted that the employee...

Chloro Controls (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Severn Trent Water Purification ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(3)BomCR119; [2006]131CompCas501(Bom); [2006]71SCL396(Bom)

R.M. Lodha, J.1. Severn Trent Water Purification Inc., USA (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner') filed a petition for winding up the Capital Controls (India) Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the Company') on just and equitable grounds under Section 433(f) of the Companies Act, 1956. The learned Company Judge by his order dated 21st April 2005 admitted the company petition. Aggrieved thereby two appeals have been filed. One appeal (449/2005) is by Chloro Controls (India) Private Limited, which has 50% shareholding in the company and the other appeal (450/2005) is at the instance of the Company. As both the appeals arise out of the common order, we heard these appeals together and by this common order dispose of them. 2. The petitioner set up the case in the petition for winding up thus: (i) The petitioner is a Corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Pennsylvania, USA having its office and place of business at 3000 Advance Lane, Colmar, Penns...

Motilal Manshi Shah Vs. Suryakant K. Sheth

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2006Bom246; 2006(3)MhLj328

S.U. Kamdar, J.1. The present notice of motion has been initiated inter alia for seeking relief of appointment of Court receiver, High Court, Bombay and/or granting of interim Order of restraining the defendant from alienating, encumbering developing any tenancy right or creating new tenancy or parting with possession of the suit property being a plot of land along with the building standing thereon known as 'Irla Sadan' situated at Irla, Ville Parle (West), Bombay 56. Some of the material facts of the present case briefly enumerated are as under:2. The suit has been filed inter alia seeking a declaration that there is a valid and subsisting agreement in respect of a suit property dated 8-9-2000 being Ex. B to the plaint and further reliefs of specific performance of the said agreement dated 8-9-2000 is sought. The plaintiff has also claimed that a deed of assignment executed by and between the defendant No. 1 and defendant No. 3 to be declared as void and fabricated document and the s...

Gopal G. Nipane Vs. Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(3)MhLj376

F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. Heard forthwith. The petitioner at the time of his dismissal from service was working as Senior Manager (Customer Services) with respondent No. 1. The petitioner was recruited in the service of the respondent No. 1 against a reserved post. The petitioner for that purpose produced his school leaving certificate which disclosed that the petitioner belonged to Halba Scheduled Tribe. The petitioner joined the respondent No. 1 initially as Management Trainee and was appointed by letter dated 12th August, 1978. On completion of training the petitioner joined the respondent No. 1 as Grade II Officer on 12th November, 1979. On 13th November, 1983 the petitioner was promoted as Deputy Chief Inspector/Deputy Manager and was promoted as Chief Inspector/Manager on 11th November, 1986. The petitioner was transferred to Nasik Division as Grade IV Officer in Customer Service on 2nd April, 1994. It is the case of the petitioner that the reservation Roster Point in promotion is...

Prakash M. Adhau Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006CriLJ2226; II(2006)DMC240

R.C. Chavan, J.1. Appellant Prakash, who has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Akola for offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 500/- has preferred this appeal challenging his conviction.2. Fact which led to prosecution and conviction of the appellant, are as under:The appellant was married to Anuradha in the year 1993. The couple has two children - a daughter by name Kalpana and a son by name Shivsagar. The appellant used to harass and ill-treat Anuradha. This had led Anuradha to give report to the police on 27-8-1998, on the basis of which a crime was registered. Anuradha was staying with her parents after this incident of the year 1998. Accused Prakash was thereafter seriously ill and admitted to Civil Hospital, Akola. Anuradha went to see her husband, where the appellant - her husband- assured that he would not ill-treat her and requested her to come back to the matrimonial hom...

Ramesh Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2(2006)DMC328

R.C. Chavan, J.1. By this appeal, the appellant challenges his conviction by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur, for offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Penal Code and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for three months and fine of Rs. 1,000 imposed upon him.2. Facts, which led to prosecution of the appellant, are as under:The appellant was married to Kusum in the year 1982. The parties resided initially at Belora and since about two years before the incident, shifted to Balaji Ward, Chandrapur, where Kusum's family was also residing. The accused stopped maintaining Kusum and used to beat her. On 5.4.1992, Kusum set herself on fire. She was admitted to General Hospital, Chandrapur, where she succumbed to her burn injuries. On the report, an offence was registered and investigation commenced. The police recorded statements of witnesses. Before her death, Kusum had also made a statement to the police in presence of Panchas that she had poured kerosene on her perso...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. G and Y Soaps Works

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The Revenue is aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) holding that it is not the respondents herein but M/s.Turab HV Herbals (P) Ltd. (who were loan licensees), who were the manufacturers of Carmino Branded Soaps using their own raw material by affixing their own brand name under their own control and supervision in the factory of the respondents herein.2. None appears for the respondents and hence we have heard the ld. SDR and perused the records.3. We find that the department sought to deny the benefit of SSI exemption under Notification No. 8/99, dated 28-2-99 on the ground that M/s. G&Y Soaps Works, the respondents herein, used the brand name 'Carmino' belonging to M/s. Turab H.V. Herbals Pvt. Ltd. The issue in dispute is, as to who is to be treated as the manufacturer of the goods in question - whether G&Y Soaps Works in whose factory the manufacture took place or M/s. Turab H.V. Herbals Pvt. Ltd. who got the goods manufactured in the fa...

T.i.S.C.O. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Heard both sides. The period in dispute is from May 1986 to January 1989 and the amounts in dispute are Rs. 3,71,92,640.90 as duty, an equal amount of penalty and redemption fine of Rs. 20 Lakhs. (i) Denovo proceeding in pursuance of Hon'ble High Court, Patna, Bench at Ranchi's order dated 21.08.98 in C.W.J.C. 197 of 1991 against the order-in-original 20-MP/Collr/90 dated 22.11.1990 passed by Collector, Central excise, Patna in respect of SCN No. V(73)(15)27/88/Part.5523 dated 04.12.1989, and (ii) SCN NO. V(15) T-3/11/878/5765 dated 18.07.88 issued by Deputy Collector, Central Excise, Jamshedpur.3. As regard the duty liability on the impugned goods is concerned Dr.Samir Chakraborthy, learned advocate for the appellants fairly concedes that the issue of excisability including the question of manufacture and marketability of such goods has been decided by the Larger Bench decision in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. and Ors. v. CCE, Aurangabad and Ors. - 2005 (71) RLT 513 (CE...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Apr Packaging Industries Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The Revenue seeks stay of operation of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) who has sanctioned the claim for refund of service tax of Rs. 18,49,683/- covering the period 16-11-1997 to 2-6-1998.2. None appears for the respondents; hence we heard the Id. SDR and perused the records.3. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has entirely relied upon the Tribunal's decision in the case of L.H. Sugar Factories Ltd. to hold that the assessees are entitled to the refund. However, we see prima facie force in the contention of the Id.SDR that the judgment of L.H. Sugar Factories Ltd. would apply to a case where the department raises demand for recovery of service tax and will, prima facie, not cover the situation in the present case, where the service tax has voluntarily paid by the assessees but has sought refund. We, therefore, see merit in the prayer of the department for stay of operation of the impugned order. We accordingly allow the applications by granting the p...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Ballarpur Industries Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(112)ECC135

1. The Revenue seeks stay of operation of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) who has sanctioned the claim for refund of service tax of Rs. 8,84,499/- and Rs. 2,70,503/- covering the period 16-11-1997 to 2-6-1998.3. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has entirely relied upon the Tribunal's decision in the case of L.H. Sugar Factories Ltd. to hold that the assessees are entitled to the refund. However, we see prima facie force in the contention of the Id.DR that the judgment of L.H. Sugar Factories Ltd. would apply to a case where the department raises demand for recovery of service tax and will, prima facie, not cover the situation in the present case, where the service tax has voluntarily paid by the assessees but sought refund. We, therefore, see merit in the prayer of the department for stay of operation of the impugned order. We accordingly allow the applications by granting the prayer for stay....