Mumbai Court December 2007 Judgments

Seema W/O Arun Bapat (Dead) Lrs. Arun S/O Prabhakar Bapat and ors. Vs. ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(2)ALLMR70; 2008(1)MhLj747

C.L. Pangarkar, J.1. This is a second appeal by the plaintiff. A few facts may be narrated thus-Plaintiff's father Ramdas was serving with the Municipal Council, Buldhana, who is the defendant in this suit. He died while in service in the year 1975. The plaintiff applied for her appointment on a compassionate ground. The Municipal Council i.e. the defendant appointed the plaintiff in place of her father. She was, however, appointed as a Class IV servant. She, in fact, possessed the qualification for being appointed as a Clerk but she was appointed on daily wages as Class IV. She was later confirmed w.e.f. 1-2-1982 on the class IV post. Although she was appointed as Class IV servant, she was discharging duty of class III servant. It is the contention of the plaintiff that her claim for being appointed as Class IV was always ignored by the defendant. The defendant made certain appointments on 31-8-1982 but did not consider the plaintiff. Ultimately, it is contended by the plaintiff that ...

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Vimal Narayanrao Nandanwar and ors ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008ACJ2274; 2008(2)ALLMR67; 2008(1)MhLj626

C.L. Pangarkar, J.1. This is an appeal by non-applicant No. 3 United India Insurance Company. Respondent is the claimant. Her son Kamdev was working as a casual labourer on 14-10-1991. He was working with the Central Armament Depot at Pulgaon. For the purpose of said employment on the date of incident he was travelling in vehicle No. MH-31/G-772. It is alleged that while he was so travelling in the premises of the Central Armament Depot the vehicle overturned and Kamdev died on the spot. It is alleged that the vehicle was being driven rashly and negligently. Matter was reported by the Engineer of respondent No. 1 Company to whom the tractor belonged, to the police. Offence was registered against respondent No. 2 the driver of the said vehicle. It is alleged that the deceased was earning Rs. 1000/- to 1200/- per month and since he has died the mother who is claimant has filed the application.2. Respondent No. 1 the owner of the vehicle filed a Written Statement and resisted the applicat...

State of Maharashtra Vs. Ibrahim A. Patel

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008CriLJ1496

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard the learned APR None present for the respondent, though duly served.2. By the present petition, the petitioner is seeking to quash and to set aside the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai in Criminal Revision Application No. 83 of 2002 on 4th September, 2002 whereby the Additional Sessions Judge has set aside the order dated 18th December, 2001 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, Mumbai in Case No. 55/Misc/2001. The contention of the petitioner is that the Magistrate exercising its power under Section 156(3) of Criminal Procedure Code cannot direct the State CID to conduct the investigation, and the powers of the Magistrate can be exercised to direct the police officer attached to the Police Station situated within the territorial jurisdiction of the concerned magistrate.3. Placing reliance on the decision of the learned single Judge of Karnataka High Court in Narsimhaiah v. State of Karnataka and Anr. reported in : ILR2002KAR3157 , ...

Percept Talent Management Pvt. Ltd. a company registered under the Com ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(2)ALLMR72; 2008(2)ARBLR49(Bom); 2008(2)BomCR654; 2008(3)MhLj94

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. Yuvraj Singh plays cricket for India. As the First Respondent, he is arrayed as a party to this proceeding off the field of cricket. A thin end of the wedge divides what a sports person does on the field and off it. But, it is the law which addresses legal rights and duties. The law will govern this dispute.The Agreement:2. An agreement styled as a Promotion Agreement, was entered into between the Second Petitioner and the First Respondent purportedly on 12th December 2003. By the agreement, the First Respondent appointed the Second Petitioner as his sole and exclusive agent inter alia to manage and market the services and day to day affairs of the First Respondent in respect of media, advertisement and related activities. By a Deed of Assignment dated 1st April 2007 all the rights and obligations of the Second Petitioner under the first agreement were duly assigned in favour of the First Petitioner. Clause 9 of the agreement provided that during the contractual ...

Shri P.R. Nair and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(1)ALLMR648; 2008(2)BomCR89; (2008)110BOMLR127; (2008)IILLJ332Bom; 2008(2)MhLj191

Roshan Dalvi, J.1. A short point of law covered by the judgment of the Apex Court is required to be considered in this Writ Petition.2. The petitioners work in the Cadets Mess of the Armed Forces Medical College (AFMC). The college is run by the Central Government. It is fully funded by the Central Government. It has a residence hostel. The Mess is administered by a Mess Committee comprising the students of the College. The mess is one of the facilities provided to the students in the College Campus. The Mess Committee is the students body comprising the Mess Secretary, Assistant Mess Secretary, Food Member and Property Member etc. who are nominated/elected by the students.3. There are no sanctioned posts for the students mess. Hence, the students themselves employ persons for the activities of the mess.4. As per the list, Exhibit-A to the Petition, the petitioners work in capacity of Cashier, Billing Clerks, Clerks, Plate washers, Messengers, Waiters, Masalchi, Barbar and Office boy o...

Maharashtra Shikshan Prasarak Mandal a Public Charitable Trust and Sau ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(2)BomCR137; (2008)110BOMLR78; 2008(2)MhLj138

B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. Appeal No. 8/1994 filed under Section 9 of the MEPS Act, 1977 by 4 different employees/teachers came to be decided by the Judgement and order dated 26-7-1994 and the same had been impugned in these 4 petitions. Hence, the petitions are decided by a common Judgement.2. The Petitioner No. 1 is a Public Trust registered under the provisions of Bombay Public Trust Act, with registration No. E-219 Thane dated 13-5-1961 and it was formed for the purpose of imparting education. Petitioner No. 2 was the Managing Trustee of the Petitioner No. 1 at the relevant time. The Petitioner No. 1 was running a primary school known as 'Maharashtra Vidyalaya' Secondary School known as 'Dhanaji Nana Chaudhari Multi purpose High School and junior college. In the year 1991-92 the Petitioners started the Centrally sponsored plus 2 stage Vocational Education Scheme (VES) under the New Education Policy and the qualifications for the teachers for such vocational courses came to be approved b...

Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation Through Its Chief Execu ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(1)ALLMR654; 2008(2)BomCR34; (2008)110BOMLR63; 2008(1)MhLj813

R.C. Chavan, J.1. This appeal by the acquiring body is directed against the judgment of 9th Adhoc Additional District Judge, Nagpur in Land Acquisition Case No. 55 of 1997, whereby the learned Judge granted enhanced compensation to respondent No. 1 for 5.28 hectares of respondent No. 1's land bearing Gut No. 72 in village Dhurkheda, Tahsil : Umred, District : Nagpur.2. The appellant Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation is a statutory Corporation established under the Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as MID Act.). The MID Act provides for acquisition of lands for industrial development of undeveloped areas. Clause (2) of Section 32 of the Act provides for publication of a notice which corresponds to notice under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. In respect of the land in question such notice under Clause (2) of Section 32 of the MID Act was issued on 16.08.1989 and published in the official gazette on 14.09.1989. A further notice to be...

Kores (India) Limited Vs. Whale Stationery Products Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2008)110BOMLR276; 2008(3)MhLj523; LC2008(1)155; 2008(36)PTC463(Bom)

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. The present order will dispose of the Plaintiff's Notice of Motion for an injunction in an action for infringement and passing off. On the request of both the learned Counsel appearing for the contesting parties, the Motion has been taken up for final disposal. The bone of contention in the suit is a trade mark, KORES and the device of a lady typist sitting before a typewriter. The case of the Plaintiff is that in or about 1924, a person by the name of W. Koreska, commenced the business of sale and distribution of duplicating stencils in India. The business in India was first commenced in Calcutta and was gradually extended to Bombay and was carried on under the mark KORES. The Plaintiff is a Company by the name of Kores India Pvt. Ltd. which was incorporated in the year 1936. The mark is stated to have been used in India initially by the firm of Mr. Koreska in respect of goods imported into India by a British Company by the name of Kores . After the formation of...

Vinay Parulekar Vs. Pramod Meshram

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008CriLJ2405; 2008(2)MhLj115

D.B. Bhosale, J.1. These two appeals, preferred by Vinayak Parulekar, the complainant, are directed against the two judgments and orders of acquittal of the respondent - accused rendered in two criminal cases bearing No. 138/OA/1997/D and 130/OA/1997/D. Both these cases were filed by the complainant under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'the Act').2. Criminal Appeal No. 37/2006 is directed against the judgment and order dated 16-12-2005 passed by the learned Magistrate in Criminal Case No. 138/OA/1997/D (for short 'the first case') and Criminal Appeal No. 38/2006 is directed against the judgment and order dated 16-12-2005 passed by the learned Magistrate in Criminal Case No. 130/OA/1997/OA (for short 'the second case'). By the impugned judgments the trial Court has acquitted the accused of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, (for short 'the Act')3. Though the cheques and the evidence led by the parties in these two cases are ...

Sgs India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This stay application is directed against the confirmation of demand of Service Tax of Rs. 82.16 lakhs and penalty of Rs. 1.25 crores on the appellants.2. Considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records. It is the contention by the Ld. Counsel that the services which were provided by the applicant are for the foreign based purchasers who required the services for testing and inspection by the appellant and based upon such report the goods are dispatched to the foreign purchasers. It is his submission that this issue regarding the export of services and this export of services are not taxable as per the statement of Government of India, and the Central Board of Excise & Customs Circular No. 56/5/2003-S.T. dt. 25.4.2003. He submits that the entire demand is time barred on the ground that the demand is for the period July 2003 to November 2003 while show cause notice is issued in January 2006. He submits that they are registered with Service Tax Department as...