Mumbai Court September 2006 Judgments

Manjit Singh Sethi S/o Moolsingh Sethi Vs. Maharashtra Assembly, Mahar ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(1)CTC42; 2006(6)MhLj849

S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The present petition has been filed seeking a Writ of Habeas Corpus, challenging the detention arising out of an order dated 11th /12th April 2006, passed by the State Legislative Assembly, Maharashtra State, Mumbai, awarding a punishment of detention for 90 days to the Petitioner for the breach of privilege of the State Legislative Assembly.2. The facts which are relevant to decide this petition are as follows:The Petitioner, the President of Fight for Right Bar Owners' Association, Mumbai had attended a meeting organized by the Dance Bar Girls' Association. Thereafter a new item appeared in the daily 'Sakal' under a caption 'Wives of the Ministers' shall not be allowed to move on the streets', which claimed that the Petitioner had made the above statement and had abused the Deputy Chief Minister of State, Shri R.R. Patil. The Petitioner was thereafter sentenced to undergo 90 days imprisonment on account of Breach of Privilege of the House after an enquiry by an...

Rai Bahadur Gujarmal Modi and Bros. Pvt. Ltd., a Company Incorporated ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(6)BomCR662; [2008]143CompCas156(Bom); [2006]72SCL251(Bom)

R.M. Lodha, J.1. We heard Mr. S.H. Doctor, the senior counsel for the Appellant; Mr. V.R. Dhond, the counsel for Respondent No. 1-Company and Mr. N.H. Seervai, the senior counsel for the Respondent No. 2. 2. The Appellant made an application under section 84(4) of the Companies Act, 1956, being Company Application No.101 of 2005 before the learned Company Judge, praying therein that the first Respondent Company, namely, Godfrey Phillips India Ltd., be directed to forthwith issue duplicate share certificates for 8,350 equity shares held by the Applicant-Appellant. In the said Company Application, K.K. Modi (the second respondent) made an Application, directing the Applicant (Appellant herein) to implead him as party Respondent in the Company Application. We are informed that vide order dated 20th January, 2006, the Application made by Mr. K.K. Modi for his impleadment, was made absolute. 3. The learned Company Judge heard the parties and by the order dated 6th of July, 2006, took the vi...

Ashokkumar Hiralal Lohiya Vs. the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(6)BomCR665

B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges the order of compulsory retirement dated 3rd November 2004 passed under Rule 10(4)(a)(i) of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982 by the Governor / State Government on the recommendations of the High Court on its administrative side and also the communication dated 28th February 2005 addressed to him by the Registrar General of this Court informing him that the representation filed by him on 21/12/2004 was rejected by the Hon'ble Chief Justice and Judges of this Court. 2. Rule. Respondents waive service. Rule is taken up for final hearing forthwith with the consent of the parties. 3. The petitioner was born on 12th June 1950 and came to be enrolled as an advocate in 1974. He entered the judiciary as a Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate, First Class on 19/7/1978. He came to be promoted as Civil Judge, Senior Division in November 1987. He was further promoted to the...

Silver Jublee Dryers and Cleaners and ors. Vs. Hiralal Nemichand Shah ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(6)BomCR530; 2006(6)MhLj840

V.C. Daga, J. 1. This petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 11.7.1997 passed by the 9th Additional District Judge, Pune, in Civil Appeal No. 290/1991, confirming the judgment and order dated 12.4.1991 passed by the Principal Judge, Small Causes Court, Pune, in Civil Suit No. 1001/1988, dismissing the suit filed by the plaintiff to recover possession of the suit premises from the defendant and directing enquiry regarding mesne profits, in accordance with provisions of Order 20 Rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure Code. Background Facts: 2. The undisputed background facts brought on record is that one Shri Jivraj Bapuchand Gujarathi was the original owner of the suit property. He had one sister by name Smt. Sonubai Bhaichand Doshi and wife Smt. Putalabai, 3. It appears that Sonubai had adopted a son by name Shri Nemichand Bhaichand Doshi, who had two sons by name Hiralal and Maniklal i.e. original plaintiff Nos. 1 & 2. 4. It further appears that, aforesaid Sonubai, ...

Umabai W/O Uttamji Dangore Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(6)ALLMR796; 2006(6)MhLj33

B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks relief of quashing and setting aside of the order dated 3-7-2006. passed by the respondent No. 1 Hon'ble Minister, holding that the President of Municipal Council, is not eligible to vote in election for the post of Vice President, and thereby cancelling the said election, which had taken place on 20-12-2005.2. The case of petitioner is that, she has been elected as Vice President of Municipal Council, Umarkhed (respondent No. 4) on 20-12-2005. The petitioner and respondent No. 3 were the only contesting candidates for the post of Vice President and, that petitioner secured 11 votes, while the respondent No. 3 secured 10 votes. According to her, in view of the provisions of Section 2(7), 2(49) and Section 51A of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Municipal Council Act' or 'the Act', for short), the President of Municipal Council is entitl...

Raghuvir Dessai Vs. State

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007CriLJ829

N.A. Britto, J.1. This appeal is by the accused who has been convicted and sentenced under Sections 342 and 376(2)(f), IPC by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Margao.2. The accused was a watchman of a Government School known as Sahakari Pratnik Vidhlaya situated at Molcornem within the jurisdiction of Quepem Police Station of which Shaikh Ismail/P.W. 7 was the Headmaster. The said school was being run in two sessions. The secondary section was run in the morning session, whilst the primary section was run in the evening session of which Channama Patel/P.W. 4 and Chitra Gaonkar/P.W. 13 were the primary teachers. The victim/P.W. 11, Ramesh/P.W. 12, Swapnil Kerkar/P.W. 9 and Sonali Gaonkar/P.W. 10 were the students of the said primary section. Yeshwant Bhile/P.W. 14 was the Peon of the said school.3. The accused was charged and tried with an allegation that on 6-8-2003 at about 13.30 hours the accused wrongfully confined the victim/P.W. 11, who at the relevant time was 8 years old an...

Shamrao Shripat Tamgade and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(6)ALLMR55; 2006(6)BomCR11; [2007(2)JCR121(NULL)]

S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The petitioner Shamrao Shripat Tamgade (Writ Petition No. 214 of 1993) after passing the SSC Examination in 1958 was initially appointed as an English Section Writer in the Court of the District Judge, Chandrapur, on June 18, 1960. He was promoted as a Clerk thereafter in the Mofussil Judiciary. In 1978, he was temporarily promoted as a Senior Clerk for some time and was again reverted as a Junior Clerk. On passing the Lower Standard Departmental Examination in 1972, he joined the Aurangabad bench of the High Court in 1981. He worked as Assistant Superintendent from December 12, 1983, upto December 1, 1986. He was appointed as the Superintendent on and from September 1, 1987 and as Senior Superintendent on and from March 16, 1990. By this petition, he is seeking further promotions in the reserved category.The petitioner Dashrath Aba Khabade (in Writ Petition No. 215 of 1993) obtained his graduation (BA) in 1964, post-graduation (MA) in 1969 and he passed the Lowe...

Manjit Singh Sethi Vs. Maharashtra Assembly and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2007(4)JCR388(NULL)]

S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The present petition has been filed seeking a writ of habeas corpus, challenging the detention arising out of an order dated 11th/12th April, 2006, passed by the State Legislative Assembly, Maharashtra State, Mumbai, awarding a punishment of detention for 90 days to the petitioner for the breach of privilege of the State of Legislative Assembly.2. The facts which are relevant to decide this petition are as follows:The petitioner, the President of Fight for Right Bar Owners' Association, Mumbai had attended a meeting organized by the Dance Bar Girls' Association. Thereafter a new item appeared in the daily 'Sakal' under a caption 'Wives of the Ministers' shall not be allowed to move on the streets', which claimed that the petitioner had made the above statement and had abused the Deputy Chief Minister of State, Shri R.R. Patil. The petitioner was thereafter sentenced to undergo 90 days imprisonment on account of breach of privilege of the House after an enquiry by...

Haresh Java Vs. Vysya Bank Leasing Ltd. and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: IInd.Cas.60

S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This Criminal Application filed in the year 1998, was admitted by me on 31st August, 2006 and directed that it may be heard finally after two weeks, to appear high on board. There is already appearance filed on behalf of respondent No. 1-original complainant. The notice was also issued prior to admission and from 1998 there is ad interim order staying further proceedings before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 48th Court, Girgaum, Mumbai.2. It is in such circumstances, I have proceeded to hear the matter finally.3. The petitioner is the original accused No. 6 in complaint case No. 511/S/48 pending on the file of Metropolitan Magistrate 40th Court, Girgaum, Mumbai.4. The complainant alleges commission of offences under Sections 138 and 141 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short N.I. Act)4.1 The complainant has stated that the original accused No. 1 is a Public Limited Company of which accused Nos. 2 to 6 are Directors. In para 2 of the complaint this is what...

Mukesh Metal Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex. and Cus.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. These are appeals filed by M/s. Mukesh Metal Industries Private Limited (hereinafter called "the appellant company") and Mr. Piyush Shyamkaran Vyas, Manager and authorized signatory of the appellant company against the Order Nos. RKS/241-242-243/DAMAN/04 dated 28-9-2004 of the Commissioner (Appeals) by which he has upheld the order-in-original passed by the Dy. Commissioner of Central Excise, Valsad Division by Order No. BLS/273/2001 dated 28-12-2001 in so far as they relate to these appellants are concerned. (a) On 16-12-1998 excisable goods carried in a truck without excise documents were intercepted at the entrance of GIDC, Killa Pardi, N.H. No. 8, Dist. Valsad and brass pipes weighing 3547.400 kgs., valued at Rs. 5,60,489/- were seized along with the truck carrying/transporting the illegally removed excisable goods. (b) Verification at the factory indicated that last invoice was issued on 10-12-1998 only and Shri Piyush Shyamkaran Vyas, Manager and authorized signatory of the a...