Mumbai Court March 2007 Judgments

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corp ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(6)ALLMR843; 2007(5)BomCR316; 2007(5)MhLj313

D.G. Karnik, J.1. This civil revision application was heard by me in September, 2006. However on account of change of the roaster, the petition was made de part-heard. Thereafter, by an order of the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice, it has been re-assigned to me. I have again heard the counsel for the parties.2. The facts lie in a narrow compass and are mostly undisputed. The respondent is an owner of the property known as Mercantile Chambers situate at Veer Nariman Road, Mumbai 400 001. The premises admeasuring 5759 sq.ft. situate at 3rd floor thereof (hereinafter referred to as 'the suit premises') were let out by the respondent to the petitioner several years ago. Though the tenancy of the petitioner was terminated by a notice to quit dated 17th October, 1992, it continued in occupation of the suit premises by reason of the protection against eviction enjoyed by the tenants under the Bombay Rents and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (for short 'the Bombay Rent Act'). On repeal ...

Neptune Clearing Agency Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Gen.)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The present appeal is against the impugned order passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai, vide which he has ordered revocation of CHA licence of the appellants and forfeiture of the entire amount of security deposit.2. We have heard Shri H.R. Shetty, Ld. Advocate, appearing for the appellants and Shri Dewalwar, Ld. DR appearing for the revenue.3. As per facts on records, one Shri V.S. Katti, CHA employee made amendments in Bill of Entry filed for clearance of self adhesive tape and assessed by the group appraiser attracting duty of 40%. The said rate of 40% was reduced by the employee to 20%. Subsequent to detection of above, statement of Shri V.K. Katti, were recorded wherein he admitted tampering with the rates of duty but submitted that he was under a belief that self adhesive tape was chargeable to duty @ 20% and that is how he corrected the duty. Shri C.M. Shukla, proprietor of CHA in his statement recorded on 3-2-98, deposed that he came to know about the said correctio...

Kamlesh Kumar Goel Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2008)(223)ELT65Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellants are inter alia engaged in the manufacture of Reverse Osmosis, Membrane Loaded Water Treatment System, Filtration, Desalination Plants which were cleared by them both on payment of duty as well as under exemption at nil rate of duty for supply to Ministry of Defence under exemption Notification No. 64/95, dated 16-3-1995. It is the contention of the appellants that majority of the inputs which are used in the manufacture of goods cleared to Ministry of Defence without payment of duty were imported by the appellants without payment of customs duty based on the certificate issued by the Ministry of Defence and therefore the question of availing credit does not arise.During the course of visit by the Central Excise Officers, it was found that the appellants were not maintaining separate accounts for common inputs used in the manufacture of both dutiable as well as exempted final products. As per the statement recorded, it was admitted that no separate inventory of receip...

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Adarsh Woolen Industries

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Being aggrieved with the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), vide which he has allowed clearance of "Synthetic Waste", after mutilation and has lowered the redemption fine and penalty amount, revenue has filed the present appeal.2. As per facts on records, the respondents imported Synthetic Waste from Italy against advance licence, claiming the benefit of Notification No. 43/2002-Cus. dated 19-4-2002. The said goods were examined and revenue entertained a view that the same was "Acrylic Tow" and not "Synthetic Waste", as declared by the respondents. Accordingly, samples were drawn and sent for test to Bombay Textile Research Association (BTRA), Mumbai, Textile Committee, Worli and DYCC Lab. The test report confirmed that the goods in question were "Acrylic Tow".The denier was found to be ranging between 1.9 to 2.7 and by adopting the value of "Acrylic Tow" of Denier 3.0, the assessable value of the goods was also enhanced. It was also felt that the goods were liable to anti...

Tata Technologies Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

(a) SAP R/3 is an EAP software which consists of various modules such as cash management, investment management, production planning, plant maintenance, etc., and it is a product provided by M/s. SAP AG. (b) The appellant, M/s. Tata Technologies Limited, obtained a nonexclusive non transferable licence to use SAP R/3 software for 5,000/- users; paid licence fees to SAP India; agreed to avail maintenance service provided by SAP India and such services are offered on line by SAP India; Tata Technologies Limited (the appellant) and other Tata group companies (referred to as affiliates) are the users of above software; (c) The appellant has taken the licence from SAP India and has entered into AMC agreement with SAP India. (d) The appellant pays licence fees for the software and also pays maintenance service fees as a percentage of licence fees at the beginning of each period; each affiliates (member of Tata group companies) was also required to enter into a separate tripartite agreement ...

Shahaja Begum Mohammad Ali Through General Power of Attorney Mohammad ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(3)ALLMR30; 2007(2)BomCR568; (2007)109BOMLR672; 2007(4)MhLj439

S.B. Deshmukh, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties. 2. Rule. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith and the petition is taken up for final hearing.3. This petition is directed against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (S.D.) Aurangabad dated 15.9.2006 below application Exhibit 15 in Special Civil Suit No. 245 of 2006 (suit). 4. Present petitioner is the original plaintiff. Suit was filed on 26.7.2006 for partition and separate possession of the plaintiffs half share in the suit property and for injunction regarding alienation and creation of third party interest in the suit property till disposal of the suit. On the date of filing of the suit, it appears, that an exemption under Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959 (Act of 1959) under Section 46 and Notification dated 1.10.1994 and explanation added by Notification dated 23.3.2000 was sought by the petitioner. The petitioner has alleged in the said application that she is real sister of deceased Noorjahan Begu...

Atul Murlidharrao Adhaoo Vs. the Deputy Director, Vocational Education ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(3)ALLMR29; 2007(2)BomCR746; [2007(113)FLR921]

S.B. Mhase, J1. Heard both sides. 2. The petitioner has approached to this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking directions to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 14.8.1997 in the Original Application No. 502 of 1997 passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai (in short 'M.A.T.').3. The factual matrix are like this - The petitioner has passed 12th Standard examination with Maths and Science subjects. He has further possessed the qualification of I.T.I. Electronics Course in the year 1991, N.C.T.V.T. Course in Electronics Trade, Radio and Television Course and also the Advanced Vocational Training System Course. Initially, he was appointed on 5.12.1992 by the respondent, the Principal, I.T.I., Dist. Nashik as a Craft Instructor (Electronics) on temporary basis for a period of three months. Then again he was appointed on 14.3.1993 for a period of two months. On 2.6.1993 he was appointed on a temporary/ad-hoc basis with a direction of the M.A....

K.R. Steelunion Limited, a Company Incorporated Under the Companies Ac ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(3)BomCR821; 2007(4)MhLj280; [2007]76SCL108(Bom)

V.C. Daga, J.1. The applicant has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956 ('the Companies Act' for short), to seek leave to file and proceed with the suit in the Small Causes Court at Mumbai filed under Section 41 of the Presidency Small Causes Court Act, 1882 against the Official Liquidator and one another.THE FACTS:The factual matrix giving rise to the present application is as under.2. The applicant herein is the owner of Flat No. 12-A located in the building New Sagar Darshan, 81/83, Bhulabhai Desai Road, Mumbai - 400 026 ('the said premises' for short). 3. M/s. Poysha Industrial Company Limited ('the said Company' for short), was inducted on leave and licence basis on the terms and conditions set out in the agreement of leave and licence dated 17th June, 1975 executed between the applicants father Mr. B. P. Irani and the said Company. The licence although expired by afflux of time the said Company continued to occupy the suit premises an...

Mahindra and Mahindra Vs. Suryabahn Avhad

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(4)BomCR118; 2007(6)MhLj436

S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.1. Rule. Respondent waives service. 2. By consent of parties, Rule made returnable forthwith. 3. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged an order dated 2.12.2006 passed in Revision Application (ULP) No. 204 of 2006. By this order, the Revisional Court has partly allowed the Revision Application preferred by the Petitioner herein and has expunged the remarks and observations of the Learned Judge of the First Labour Court, Mumbai but has maintained the direction issued by the said Court in so far as directing the Petitioner to lead evidence and justify its action of termination of the respondent.4. The Revision Application was directed against an order passed by the Labour Judge, First Labour Court, Mumbai dated 24.08.2006 in Complaint (ULP) No. 602 of 2003. By this order, the First Labour court held that the inquiry against the Respondent is not fair and proper, the findings of the Enquiry Officer are perverse ...

R.P. Dhanda Vs. Regional Manager, Uco Bank and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(6)ALLMR54; 2007(4)BomCR321; [2007(113)FLR1080]; (2007)IIILLJ106Bom; 2007(4)MhLj267

V.C. Daga, J.1. Rule, returnable forthwith.2. Mr. Baware waives service for respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 2 is a formal party, hence service to respondent No. 2 is dispensed with. Heard finally by consent of parties.3. This petition is directed against the order dated 28th August, 2006 (Exh.'L') passed by respondent No. 2, the Appellate Authority under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Mumbai ('Appellate Authority' for short) thereby reversing the order dated 23rd February, 2006 passed by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act and the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Mumbai ('Controlling Authority' for short) directing respondent No. 1 to pay to the petitioner the gratuity amounting to Rs. 3,50,000/- along with interest at the rate of 10% per annum from 31st May, 2000 till the date of payment within thirty days from the date of receipt of the order.The Facts:4. The facts leading to the present writ petition are tha...