Mumbai Court April 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.
Indian Hotel and Restaurants Association (AHAR), an Association duly r ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-12-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)BomCR705
F.I. Rebello, J.1. The challenge in all these petitions is to the constitutional validity of Sections 33A and 33B of the Bombay Police Act, as amended by the Bombay Police (Amendment) Act, 2005. The bill was passed by the Legislative Assembly on 21st July, 2005 and by the Legislative Council on 23rd July, 2005 and has now come into force. The Sections under challenge may be gainfully reproduced:33A(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or the rules made by the Commissioner of Police or the District Magistrate under sub-section (1) of Section 33 for the area under their respective charges, on and from the date of commencement of the Bombay Police (Amendment) Act, 2005,-(a) holding of a performance of dance, of any kind or type, in any eating house, permit room or beer bar is prohibited;(b) all performance licences, issued under the aforesaid rules by the Commissioner of Police or the District Magistrate or any other officer, as the case may be, being the Licensing Authority,...
Rajendra Kashinath Badgujar Vs. the Union of India (Uoi), Through the ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-12-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR172; 2006(3)BomCR510; (2006)IIILLJ382Bom; 2006(3)MhLj698
V.R. Kingaonkar, J.1. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of his petition bearing Original Application No. 1050 of 1993 and Review Petition No. 69 of 2000 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai (for short 'Tribunal') the Petitioner has invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court.2. The Petitioner was appointed as a casual labourer in the Central Railway, Manmad, w.e.f. 23rd December, 1987. He was subjected to medical examination and was being given monthly pay w.e.f. 1988. He was granted not absorbed as a regular employee. His services were terminated by an order dated 17th May, 1993 on the ground that there was no further sanction to the project. He assailed the order of termination before the Tribunal. His application came to be rejected and the Tribunal held that the Petitioner was only a monthly rated casual labourer without granting of temporary status. The Tribunal held that the Petitioner is not entitled to get any legal protection in as much his services were temporarily hired...
Shri C.R. Dhuri and ors. Vs. National Textile Corporation
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-12-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR174; 2006(4)BomCR170; [2006(111)FLR1070]
S.U. Kamdar, J.1. The present writ petition is filed challenging the order passed by the Industrial Court dated 2.7.2002 in Complaint (ULP) No. 1096 of 2001. Few facts of the present case briefly enumerated are as under :2. The petitioners are the workmen of the mill known as India United Mills, Mumbai which was taken over by the respondent Corporation under the Sick Textiles Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act 57 of 1974. The petitioners were employed in the mill at the time of the said take over. Before the take over of the mill a settlement was arrived at by and between the workers of the India United Mills and the Mill on 21-2-1956. Under clause 3 of the said settlement it was inter alia provided that the retirement age of the workers from service will be 60 years but the company is entitled to retire an employee after he has attained the age of 55 years if by reason of age or infirmity he is unable to perform his duties properly. The said settlement was arrived at under Section 12(...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Renuka Ambadas Malve and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-12-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR170; 2006(4)BomCR189; [2006(111)FLR149]; 2006(3)MhLj710
ORDERD.Y. Chandrachud, J. 1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents waives service. By consent taken up for hearing and final disposal. 2. One Ambadas Shekappa Malve was working as an Assistant Sub-Inspector in the R.P.F. Department of the Central Railway at Kurduwadi. He expired on 13th November, 1998 while in service, leaving behind him the following legal heirs : 1. Kumari Sangita Ambadas Malve Daughter of first wifeAge -19 years2. Smt. Renuka Ambadas Malve Wife/2nd wifeAge - 32 years3. Sachin Ambadas Malve Son of 2nd wifeAge - 12 years4. Kumari Punam Ambadas Malve Daughter of 2nd wifeAge - 8 years5. Kumar Kashinath Ambadas Malve Son of 2nd wifeAge - 5 years3. The fifth respondent is a daughter of the deceased born from his first wife. The first wife had predeceased the employee. Thereupon he had married again and the first respondent is the second wife. The second, third and fourth respondents are all minors, children born to the First respondent...
Arun Laxmanrao Navalkar Vs. Meena Arun Navalkar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-12-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Bom342; 2006(4)ALLMR539; 2006(4)BomCR210; 2006(3)MhLj772
Roshan Dalvi, J. 1. The parties are husband and wife. Their marital relationship began in January, 1981 and ended in July, 1981 when they separated. During the time that they were together they lived at Girgaum which was their matrimonial home being a family bungalow of ground plus 2 upper floors. It was a joint family property in which they lived with 2 brothers and 2 cousins of husband. They used 2 rooms and a bath on the second floor, and the common kitchen (mess) and hall for visitors. This lis began in 1984 and has left the parties as they were 22 years ago.2. The wife separated and sued the husband for maintenance. The husband sued her for nullity of their marriage under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act on the ground of their relationship being sapindas relationship, in the alternative for divorce on the ground of cruelty, desertion and schizophrenia under Section 13(1)(ia) and 13(1)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The husband also sued for an injunction restraining the wife ...
Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Parshwa Auto Center
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-12-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR167; 2006(4)BomCR733; 2006(4)MhLj111
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. The respondent had obtained a retail dealership for petrol and diesel from the First petitioner on the Mumbai-Pune Highway at Hal Budruk, Taluka Khalapur, District Raigad. On 20th January, 2004, a communication was addressed by the Chief Regional Manager of the First petitioner adverting to a visit of the Executive Sales Officer on 1st December, 2003 during the course of which a sample of motor spirit was drawn from the retail outlet and was sent for testing. It was stated in the communication that the lab report showed that the sample did not meet the prescribed limit. A notice was issued to the respondent to show cause as to why action in terms of the dealership agreement should not be taken. An opportunity of submitting a reply was furnished to the respondent. After examining the reply of the respondent dated 30th January, 2004, the Chief Regional Manager informed the respondent on 4th February, 2004 that the failure of the sample to meet prescribed requiremen...
Vyankat Vithoba Palampalle Vs. Mohan Gundappa Bukale and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-12-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)MhLj785
S.P. Kukday, J.1. The petitioner has impugned order dated 11-3- 1998 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Omerga, recalling the order of issuing of process issued earlier.2. The facts in nutshell are that petitioner is the son of respondent No. 7. Respondent No. 8 is his sister. Agricultural lands belonging to the family are recorded in the revenue record in the name of respondent No. 7, he is shown to be cultivating the lands. There is a dispute between the petitioner and his father regarding ownership of this field. According to the petitioner his father sold his share for Rs. 10,000/- and put him in possession of the entire agricultural land. The factum of possession is borne out by Civil Suit No. 278/1995 for partition and separate possession of his share of the land and Maintenance Petition No. 230/1995 filed by respondent No. 7. According to petitioner, several complaints were lodged against him, with Police Station. Taking advantage of these complaints, the respon...
Tulsa D/O Bansi Dongre Vs. Maharashtra State Electricity Board and ors ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-12-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR193; 2006(5)BomCR188; 2006(44)MhLj29
Kshitij R. Vyas, C.J.1. Rule returnable forthwith. Shri Moharir, learned Counsel waives service for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Shri Loney, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service for respondent No. 3.2. The petitioner in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeks direction to respondent Maharashtra State Electricity Board (for short 'MSEB') to grant her new electricity connection for the property purchased by her in auction without demanding any arrears of previous occupants.3. The petitioner is qualified and has cleared her post graduation in six subjects. She being unemployed, intended to engage her in the business of Xerox/Copy Centre. She therefore, purchased Shop No. 4 of Deep Apartments from the Sales Tax Department in an open auction held on 17th October 2003. She purchased the said shop for the consideration of Rs. 305,786/- after completing all formalities for purchase of the said shop. The said shop was registered in her name on 28th April 2...
Mtz. Industries and anr. Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-12-2006
Reported in: IV(2006)ACC674
H.L. Gokhale, J.1. Heard Mr. Madon, Senior Advocate in support of this petition. Mr. Vidyarthi appears for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. The petitioners seek to challenge the communication dated 18th May, 2004 from the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 rejecting the insurance claim made by petitioners on account of the fire which is said to have occurred at their factory on 19th August, 2003. The petitioners are supposed to be having a factory at the Industrial Estate Area on Kalyan-Bhivandi Road in District Thane and it is their case that the factory and the stock were covered under the insurance policy with the first respondent. They lodged their claim for the loss of raw material and finished goods to the tune of Rs. 2.23 crores and the plant and machinery to the tune of Rs. 23.34 lakh.2. The respondents have rejected this claim by their impugned letter dated 18th May, 2004. The rejection letter gave three major reasons, which were as follows:(a) The petitioners claim a loss of 222 Mts. of Sul...
Shradha Steels Vs. the Commissioner of Central
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-10-2006
Reported in: (2006)(110)ECC376
2. The appellants M/s. Shradha Steels is a manufacturer of M.S. Bar falling under Chapter Sub Heading No. 7214.90 and MS ingots falling under Chapter Sub Heading 7206.90 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Show cause notice was issued to the appellants proposing to levy of penalty and interest amount as the appellants failed to deposit the duty amount within the scheduled time fixed on the basis of annual capacity of production. On due adjudication of the matter, it is found that the appellant was working under compounded levy scheme as per the Section 3A of the Central Excise Act 1944 and failed to discharge the duty liability as specified by the Commissioner of Central Excise Aurangabad under Rule 96ZP(3)/96ZO of Central Excise Rules, 1944. It appears that all the manufacturers of M.S. Bars and Ingots have challenged the Notification fixing the duty liability under the ACP before the Supreme Court. Ultimately, the Supreme Court of India, upheld the validity of the Notification i...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »