Mumbai Court April 2007 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.
Charansingh Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-05-2007
Reported in: [2007(115)FLR911]
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. Considering the nature of controversy, Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard finally at the stage of admission itself with the consent of Mrs. Maldhure, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Shri Kothari, learned AGP for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Shri Mokadam, learned Counsel for respondent No. 4.As per orders of this Court dated 29.3.2007, Shri Kothari, learned AGI? appearing for Respondents No. 1 to 3 has today produced a copy of order dated 9.5.2006 passed by the Caste Verification Committee in the matter of Shri Sanjay Dhait. The Caste Verification Committee has found that he does not belong to VJ(A) category and his claim as candidate belonging to caste Wanjari which is included as NT (D) has been upheld. It is not in dispute that post in employment of Respondent No. 4 against which Shri Sanjay Dhait was initially appointed was reserved for VJ(A) category and the petitioner belongs to that caste. The petitioner also has produced a certificate issued b...
Cc (imp) Vs. Mountmine Impex Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: (2007)(118)ECC407
1. After hearing both sides on Revenue's prayer for staying the operation of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) or some time, we feel that the appeal itself can be disposed off, at this stage.Therefore, after granting stay, we proceed to decide the appeal itself.2. The facts of the case are that the respondents have imported a consignment of 'Steel Shots' and classified the same under Chapter Heading 73259920, as articles of alloy of steel. The Bill of Entry was assessed as per the declaration made by them and the assessed duty was paid by the respondents. Subsequently, the applicant filed an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) stating that the imported goods being steel shots are correctly classifiable under heading 72051021, which is chargeable to lower rate of duty and that they are also eligible to benefit of Notification No. 21/2002 (Sr. No. 190 B). The claim was accepted by the Commissioner (Appeals), who allowed the appeal and remitted the matter back to the lower authori...
Prasanna Travels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ccex and St
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: (2007)9STJ153CESTAT(Mum.)bai
1. This stay application and appeal is directed against the Order-in-Original dated 13.10.2006 vide which the adjudicating authority confirmed a tax demand of Rs. 32,34,513/- and education cess amounting to Rs. 1,893/- under the category of Tour Operator and an amount of Rs. 4,939/- under the category of Mandap Keeper and imposed penalties. No appeal is preferred against that part of Order-in-Original, as regards the confirmation of service tax on the value of booking and falling under the category of Business Auxiliary Service, which has not quantified by the adjudicating authority.2. Since the issue involved in this case is covered by the decision of the Division Bench of Tribunal, Ahmedabad, we waive the pre-deposit of the amounts involved and take up the appeal itself for disposal.3. The main issue involved in this case is regarding the taxability of the services provided by the appellant under the category of Tour Operator. The appellant contested the demand on the ground that th...
Sarojani Chandrakant Tirhekar Vs. Smt. Yamunabai Sopan Zol and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)ALLMR428; 2007(4)BomCR629; 2007(4)MhLj830
B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. This Second Appeal arises from the decree passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division at Barshi in Regular Civil Suit No. 365 of 1981 for partition and perpetual injunction and duly confirmed in Regular Civil Appeal No. 625 of 1987 by the learned 3rd Addl. District Judge at Solapur. Though while admitting the appeal no substantial questions of law were framed, subsequently by written submissions placed on record sometimes in June 2000 the following substantial questions of law have been framed by the appellant - original defendant:(a) Whether unless a Certificate under Section 32-M of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act is issued, the title does not vest in the tenant-purchaser, as held by the courts below? (b) Whether Sopan could have executed a will before obtaining the 32M certificate in respect of the entire tenanted property?(c) Whether the suit property obtained by the deceased Sopan in 1950 or thereabout as a tenant, of which he later on be...
Aniruddha M. Railkar and anr. Vs. Indian Council for Social Welfare an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)ALLMR272; 2007(5)BomCR776; (2007)109BOMLR839; 2007(4)MhLj612
Roshan Dalvi, J.1. This Appeal challenges the order dated 20th February 2007 of the Family Court, Pune, rejecting the Appellants' Petition for adoption of an Indian child Shubham. The Appellants are foreign nationals of Indian origin residing in the U.S.A. They desired to adopt an Indian child. They initially applied to the Agency in the U.S.A. called Adoptions from the Heart. Their Home Study Report was done. They were approved for adoption. Since they desired to adopt an Indian child, they obtained information from the website of the Central Adoption Resource Agency (CARA), which is an autonomous body under the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, Government of India. They came to learn, inter alia, of an NGO called Preet Mandir. They were given a match for male child that they desired. They contacted the said child Shubham in April 2005. 2. CARA gave the clearance for the adoption on 4.7.2005 as it was not possible to have Indian adoption for the said child Shubham. The Appella...
Punikem Textile Private Ltd. Vs. Samidha Sanjay Munj
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)BomCR575
Kanade V.M., J.1. Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent.2. The petitioner is challenging the award passed by the 2nd Labour Court dated 7/8/ 2006 whereby 2nd Labour Court was pleased to pass an award in favour of respondent, directing reinstatement with backwages.3. Brief facts which are relevant for the purpose of deciding this petition are as under:The Petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956. The Respondent was appointed as a Clerk and had joined services of the Petitioner Company in the year 1992 and before she was terminated, she was working as Assistant Accountant. Similarly in the month of June, 2002 an Officer from Chimane Sanmitra Co-operative Society visited the establishment of the Petitioner Company and made inquiry about one Shri Kishor Shantaram Patade alleged to be employed with the Petitioner Company as Machine Operator. Accordingly, inquiry was made by the Labour...
Kailas Nilkanth Tawade Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)ALLMR126; 2007(6)BomCR362; 2007(4)MhLj759
R.M. Borde, J.1. Heard Mr. S.R. Barlinge, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. K.M. Suryawanshi, learned A.G.P. for respondent No. 1, Mr. M. S. Deshmukh, advocate for respondent No. 2 and Mr. A. B. Dhongade, learned Counsel for respondent No. 3.2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of the parties.3. The petitioner claims to be belonging to 'Tokre Koli', a Scheduled Tribe. The petitioner has obtained a caste certificate in the prescribed proforma to the effect that he belongs to 'Tokre Koli', a Scheduled Tribe on 12-4-1989. The certificate is issued by the Executive Magistrate, Jalgaon. The petitioner, on the strength of the said certificate, secured employment as Conductor with Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation. The caste certificate of the petitioner was referred to the Scrutiny Committee for the purposes of verification of status claim. It further appears that the Scrutiny Committee called for report of the vigilance officer. It was reveal...
China Shipping Development Co. Ltd. Vs. Lanyard Foods Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)BomCR684; [2008]142CompCas647(Bom); [2007]77SCL197(Bom)
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. In pursuance of a contract of affreightment dated 23-12-1999 for a consignment of RDB Palmolein Cargo, the respondent executed four letters of indemnity of 13-4-2000. Those letters were purported to have been issued by the company jointly and severally with the State Bank of Saurashtra. For the purposes of the present proceedings, reliance has been placed by both the Counsel on the Indemnity bearing No. 1308. The provisions of the indemnity contained the following request to the Petitioner:We hereby request you to order the vessel to proceed to Mangalore and give delivery of the said cargo at the port of Mangalore to delivery to the order of Lanyard Foods Ltd. No. 1119-A, Kiadb Industrial Area, Balkanpadi, Mangalore 975011, India without production of the original Bills of Lading.The request contained in the other three letters of indemnify (bearing Nos. 1065,1066 and 1309) was similar, save and except that the Ports of delivery were referred to therein as Chenna...
Medha Gaurav Talekar Vs. Gaurav Kaluram Talekar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)ALLMR264; 2007(3)BomCR52; II(2007)DMC243; 2007(4)MhLj774
Roshan Dalvi, J.1. This Appeal challenges the ex parte judgment and order passed on 12-7-2001 by the Family Court No. 2, Pune, granting the decree of divorce to the respondent (husband) under the provisions of Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act.2. The parties were married on 13-5-1999 according to Hindu vedic rites. It was alleged by the respondent in the Petition filed in the Family Court that the appellant (wife) left the matrimonial home and went to reside with her maternal uncle from 22-5-1999. The parties never lived together since then. After the Petition came to be filed for divorce, writ of summons was served upon the respondent (wife) by Registered Post. It has been received by her on 3-10-2000. She did not appear in Court at any time and did not file her Written Statement. The averments made in the Petition remained uncontroverted. The petitioner has been granted a decree of divorce upon such uncontroverted averments.3. It is the case of the appellant (wife) that, in...
Sonali D/O Krishna Mohadikar Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)MhLj130
A.H. Joshi, J.1. Rule. Rule is made returnable and is heard forthwith. Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner, and the learned AGP for the respondents.2. Petitioner's caste certificate dated 31-7-1995 was furnished for scrutiny. In the meanwhile, the petitioner appeared in MAH-AR-CET 2004 Test on 11th July, 2004, and was granted admission subject to production of validity certificate of her caste (Halba Scheduled Tribe) for the Course of Bachelor of Architecture. She paid her tuition fees of Rs. 40,000/- on 7-8-2004.3. In the meanwhile, the petitioner had completed her first year Engineering Course in Architecture in April, 2005, and thereafter, took admission in second year, and also paid the fees of Rs. 40,000/-.4. The petitioner's caste claim was invalidated by judgment and order dated 8-9-2005 by the Scrutiny Committee. When the petitioner had completed her 3 months of instructions in the Engineering College, the invalidation has attained the finality.5. We find that at present ...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »