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.
Kakasaheb Shidu Mhaske, Indian Inhabitant Vs. the Municipal Corporatio ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-19-2007
Reported in: 2007(6)ALLMR320; 2007(5)BomCR366; [2007(114)FLR956]; 2007(4)MhLj837
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. Short question that falls for consideration of the Court in the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is whether an employee at the fag end of his service career can claim a right for change of date of birth and grant of consequential reliefs as a result thereof? 2. The facts giving rise to the above question are that the petitioner, K.S. Mhaske, was born on 24th February, 1951, at Ambegaon, Tal. Kadegaon, Dist. Sangli. According to him, the date of birth noticed in the service records of the petitioner was 1st June, 1949. He was interviewed by the Maharashtra Public Service Commission for the post of Ward Officer (now designated as Assistant Commissioner) in the services of the first respondent as 'Other Backward Class' candidate and was appointed to that post on 12th January, 1992. Thereafter he was promoted to the post of Deputy Municipal Commissioner on 2nd July, 2005, and in normal course he would have superannuated from the p...
Food Corporation of India Employees Association, West Zone, Affiliated ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-19-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)BomCR282; 2007(6)MhLj151
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. Shri J.J. Halarnekar, petitioner No. 2, joined the services of the first respondent at Bombay in the year 1958. Having rendered satisfactory service for a considerable time, the second petitioner was promoted to the post of AGII (D) and thereafter AGI (D). He had put in nearly 35 years of service with a clean and unblemished service record. He was working in the office of the District Manager, Food Corporation of India, Cortalium, Goa. In the month of January, 1986, there was heavy arrival of wheat by upcountry wagons. The wheat bags were kept in open space near the godown. It was an emergency decision as there was no place to store the grains. The wheat bags which were kept in open space were infested with pigs, buffaloes, rats, birds, etc. There was no compound wall. The order for keeping the stocks in the open area was passed by the higher authorities and, according to the second petitioner, he was only implementing the orders. Day-to-day expense of Rs. 90,00...
State of Maharashtra and ors. Vs. Layakmiya Bademiya Shaikh and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-19-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)BomCR854; 2007(5)MhLj64
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. By consent of the parties heard forthwith.2. The petitioner State, has moved this Court aggrieved by the order passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT) dated 22nd December, 2006 in Original Application No. 828 of 2005. The respondent No. 1 was the original applicant and respondent Nos. 2 to 9 here were the original respondents Nos. 4 to 11 before the learned Administrative Tribunal. In the Original Application the respondent No. 1 had prayed for setting aside the order dated 4th July, 2005. By that order the State Government decided to fix the seniority of women police inspectors. The further reliefs sought was by way of a mandatory direction to restrain the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 from issuing any promotion orders on the basis of the seniority positions emerging from the grant of deemed dates as per the order dated 4th July, 2005. Various other reliefs were also sought which need not be set out.Respondent No. 1 was selected as Police Sub Inspecto...
Bhilwara Spinners Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Ep)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-18-2007
Reported in: (2007)(214)ELT413Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Vide his impugned order, the Commissioner has confirmed demand of duty of Rs. 2,25,37,442/- along with confirmation of interest and imposition of personal penalty of Rs. 1 lakh upon the appellants. In addition, capital goods imported by them stands confiscated with an option to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 2 lakhs.2. We have heard both sides duly represented by Shri V Sridharan, Ld.Advocate for the appellants and Shri S.G. Diwalwar, Ld. SDR for the revenue. i) The appellants obtained Export Promotion Capital Goods (hereinafter referred to as EPCG) licence dated 14/01/98, in terms of para 6.2 of the policies. The said licence was procured by the appellants in terms of the 0% duty scheme in terms of Notification No. 29/97-Cus. It is pertinent to note that during the relevant period, there were two types of EPCG scheme. The salient features of both the schemes are as under: Inasmuch as the licence was granted to the appellants in terms of the 0% duty scheme, in...
Shri Surendra Mohan Hajela, Shri Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-18-2007
Reported in: (2007)(119)ECC215
1. These are applications for waiver of pre-deposit of duty amounting to Rs. 1,84,64,188/- along with equivalent amount of penalty imposed on M/s. Lift Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd. under Section 11AC of Central Excise Act and interest under Section 11AB. A penalty of Rs. 5 lakh is also imposed on M/s. Lift Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd. under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 along with penalty of Rs. 18 lakhs each on Shri Mohan Hajela, Managing Director and Shri Bhatwati Lal Jain, Director under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002.2. The brief facts of the case are that M/s. Lift Systems (India) Pvt.Ltd. are engaged in the manufacture of hydraulic systems for lift automatic doors for lifts and elevators and were availing SSI benefit by paying duty at concessional rate of duty applicable to them in terms of relevant notifications from time to time. Investigation revealed that the applicants were manufacturing goods bearing brand name of another person viz. 'Fermator' which is the brand ...
Contests2win.Com India Private Limited Vs. Cell Cast Interactive India ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-18-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)ALLMR26; 2007(5)BomCR789; (2007)109BOMLR747; LC2007(2)173; 2007(35)PTC727(Bom)
ORDERA.M. Khanwilkar, J. 1. This order will dispose of the prayer for ad-interim reliefs pressed on behalf of the plaintiff in the present Notice of Motion. 2. The plaintiff has filed the suit in this Court on 26.6.2006. Simultaneously, the plaintiff took out the above said Notice of Motion for the following reliefs:(a) that pending hearing and final disposal of the suit, the Defendant, its Directors, partners, agents and servants be restrained by a temporary order and injunction of this Honble Court from in any manner using the mark 'bid2win' or any mark containing the words 2win as a suffix or prefix as part of the Defendants contest and/or any other deceptive mark so as to pass off the Defendants contest as being the contest of the Plaintiff and/or associated with and/or authorized by and/or in any manner licensed and/or franchised by the Plaintiff or so as to pass off the Defendants business as that of the Plaintiff; b) that pending the hearing and final disposal of the suit, the C...
Cricket Club of India and ors. Vs. D.R. Shyam and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-18-2007
Reported in: 2007(6)BomCR356; (2007)IIILLJ941Bom; 2007(5)MhLj101
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. The appeal arises from the judgment dated 13th February, 1998 passed in Writ Petition No. 1758 of 1997. By the impugned judgment, the petition filed by the appellant against the judgment dated 25th September, 1997 passed by the Industrial Court, Mumbai in Revision Application No. 28 of 1997 has been dismissed. By the said order, the Industrial Court had allowed the Revision Application filed by the respondent herein against the judgment dated 30th November, 1996 of the Labour Court in the Complaint No. 205 of 1995. The said complaint was filed by the respondent alleging that appellant had engaged in unfair labour practice under Items 1(a), (b), (d) and (f) of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act').2. The main grievance of the respondent was that, in spite of she being duly appointed and confirmed as House-keeper, her services were illegally termi...
Dharamsingh S/O Sardarsingh Chabada Vs. Pritamsingh S/O Sardarsingh Ch ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-18-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALLMR201; 2008(2)BomCR906; 2007(6)MhLj29
S.B. Deshmukh, J.1. Heard learned Counsel Mr. R.N. Dhorde, instructed by Mr. R.L. Kute Advocate who appears for the petitioner, Mr. L.D. Vakil learned Counsel for respondent No. 6-a, Mr. V.D. Hon learned Counsel for respondent No. 6-b2 and Mr. S.V. Gangapurwala, learned Counsel for respondent No. 6-c. Other respondents, to whom notice was issued earlier, are served, absent. This Court by the earlier order dated 9-4-2007 at the request of learned Counsel for the petitioner, issued notices only to respondent No. 6-a to 6-d since application for amendment was moved for respondent No. 6/defendant No. 6. Suit is also part heard, therefore notices at the request of learned Counsel for the petitioner, were not directed against other respondents.2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of the parties.3. The petitioner is plaintiff No. 1 in Special Civil Suit No. 207 of 2002. On instructions from the petitioner, Mr. Dhorde, learned Counsel submits, that original plai...
Madhavji Jeyram Kotak and ors. Vs. Jay Laxmi Gopalji Surji and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-18-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)MhLj797
ORDERA.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. Heard the counsel for the parties. Perused the relevant pleadings.2. A preliminary objection is taken on behalf of the plaintiffs that the applicant, who is a third party, cannot be permitted to seek relief 'simplicitor' of vacating the ad-interim order passed by this Court on 17-10-2006 without a formal prayer for being joined as a party-defendant to the suit.3. The applicant-third party, however, contends that the applicant is entitled for asking the relief simplicitor of vacating the order dated 17-10-2006 without being joined as a party to the suit. According to the applicant, this application has been filed under Order XXXIX, Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Code, which permits even a third-party to apply for vacating an interim order passed by the Court.4. To my mind, going by the language of Order XXXIX, Rule 4, the plaintiffs are right in contending that such an application cannot be entertained at the instance of a 'third-party' to the suit; for the exp...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-18-2007
Reported in: [2008]296ITR217(Bom)
J.P. Devadhar, J.1. This application filed by the Revenue under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was admitted on April 21,1998, on the following questions of law:1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that there is no material to hold that the difference between the duty assessed by the Customs Department under Section 30(b) of the Sea Customs Act, 1878, and the contract price shown by the assessee in the contract resulted in any additional income liable to income-tax to the assessee in the face of the finding of 'proven underinvoicing' by the assessee, given by the Supreme Court?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the 'proven underinvoicing' was not deliberate or intentional?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that no variation to the book results could be made merely on th...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »