Mumbai Court June 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.
Karnataka Bank Ltd. Vs. Smt. Sunita B. Vatsaraj
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)BomCR891; (2007)109BOMLR1210; [2007(115)FLR217]
D.G. Karnik, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgement of a learned Single Judge of This Court dated 3rd March 1999 allowing the Writ Petition No. 225 of 1995 filed by the respondent and thereby quashing the award dated 4th July 1994 passed by the Central Industrial Tribunal No. 1.2. Facts stated in brief are that the respondent No. 1 (for short 'the respondent') joined the appellant bank as a trainee in December 1979 and was promoted as an officer (Grade 3) in May 1978 on basic salary of Rs. 2700/-. The respondent accepted the promotion and reported for duty at the Bandra branch of the appellant as the second highest officer after the Branch Manager. On 24th May 1978 a power of attorney was executed by the appellant in favour of the respondent conferring upon her managerial and administrative powers. The respondent functioned as an Officer at the Bandra branch till December 1981, when she proceeded on leave. She resumed duty in February 1982, and on transfer of the then branc...
Ramchandra Nathu Ghadage and ors. Vs. Rajaram Nathu Ghadage (Since Dec ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)ALLMR175; 2007(5)BomCR354; 2008(2)MhLj754
B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. This appeal arises from the decree of partition and possession passed by the learned 5th Joint Civil Judge at Satara on 17/1/1983 in Regular Civil Suit No. 241 of 1981 and confirmed by the Lower Appellate Court as per its Judgment and Order dated 21/4/1988 in Civil Appeal No. 63 of 1983. The substantial questions of law framed while admitting this second appeal are as under:(a) Was the transfer of the suit from the Court of Joint Civil Judge, J.D. to Vth Joint Civil Judge, J.D. and passing of the ex parte decree without notice to the appellants? If yes, does this omission render the ex parte decree void?(b) Does the decision in Regular Civil Suit No. 227 of 1959 bar the present suit either on the ground of res judicata or for any other reason? (c) Have the appellants been illegally deprived of their right to file written statement? 2. The suit properties are agricultural lands and residential houses and they were mentioned in schedule 'A' and 'B' to the plaint. Na...
Krishna K. Reddy Vs. R.D. Bhoyar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ685
ORDERA.P. Lavande, J.1. Heard Mr. Naidu, learned Advocate for the applicant and Mr. Wankhede, for the respondent No. 1. None present on behalf of the respondents 2, 3 and 7. The application stands dismissed as against the Respondents 4 to 6.2. By this application under Section 378(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, the applicant, who is the original complainant in Criminal Case No. 241/1986 seeks special leave to appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 25-11-2005 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ramtek, in Criminal Case No. 241/1886.2.1 The complainant filed the above case against respondents/accused alleging commission of offence under Sections 448 and 380 of IPC. It is not disputed that the respondents are employees of Maharashtra State Co-operative Land Development Bank, Parseoni Branch. Learned Magistrate, upon appreciation of the evidence led by the prosecution, and considering the defence raised by the accused, held that the accused belie...
A.P. Banaji Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-16-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)ALLMR465; 2007(4)BomCR602; 2007(4)MhLj71
D.G. Karnik, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgement and order dated 18th July 1996 of a learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing Writ Petition No. 639 of 1996. By the said Writ Petition, the appellant had prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari praying for quashing and/or setting aside the policy of de-hiring of the requisitioned flats. By the Writ Petition, the appellant had also prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents, Union of India and Chief of Naval staff to immediately and forthwith de-hire a flat belonging to the appellant bearing flat No. 3 at the building 'Cliff' Pochkhanawala Road, Worli, Mumbai (for short 'the flat'). 2. Briefly stated the facts are that in or about the year 1930, the appellants grandmother, Gulbai Banaji constructed a building by name 'the Cliff' at Pochkhanawala Road, Worli, Mumbai. At the onset of world war in the year 1939, Government of India urgently required several premises in Mumbai for the officers o...
State of Goa, Rep. by Executive Engineer, Works Division Ix (Phe), Pub ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-16-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ARBLR424(Bom); 2008(1)BomCR874
S.A. Bobde, J.1. This appeal is by the State of Goa against the Judgment dated 18th December, 2000 of the Ist Additional Civil Judge, Sr. Division, Margao in Special Civil Suit No. 331/92/B. By the Judgment, the learned Civil Judge has rejected the appellant's objections under Section 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. The appellant had objected to the arbitration award dated 3.9.92 made by the Arbitrator upon a reference made by the Civil Court in a civil suit filed by the respondent.2. The claim was made by the respondent in respect of a contract for laying down of a pipeline undertaken by him. The Arbitrator awarded a sum of Rs. 1,93,182/- in respect of eleven claims with interest at the rate of 15% per annum from 31.5.86 till realisation.3. The appellant preferred objections under Section 30 of the Arbitration Act. The trial Court which heard the objections, framed the following points for determination:1. Whether the respondent proves that the Arbitrator misconducted himself while a...
Chabada Petrol Pump Vs. Shaikh Hasan Shaikh Husain
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-16-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)ALLMR573; 2007(6)BomCR624; [2007(114)FLR593]; 2007(5)MhLj738
Deshmukh S.B., J.1. Rule. Rule made returnable and heard forth with by consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.2. Heard learned Counsel Mr. R.V. Ghuge for the petitioner and learned Counsel Mr. M.N. Deshmukh for the respondent sole.3. This Petition challenges the impugned judgement and order passed in Misc. Reference (IDA) Restoration No. 1 of 2005 dated 4-4-2007 as well as the judgement and Award, copy of which is at Exhibit 4, annexed with this Petition. At Exhibit 4 copy of the ex parte Award passed by the learned Judge, Labour Court, Aurangabad in Reference (IDA) No. 36 of 1995 is annexed.4. Learned Counsel Mr. Ghuge for the petitioner restricts his submissions to prayer pertaining to quashing and setting aside the order passed in Misc. Reference (IDA) Restoration No. 1 of 2005. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has invited my attention to Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act of 1947' for short) and Rule No. 31-A of Industrial Dis...
Jaisu Shipping Co. Pvt. Ltd. and Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-15-2007
Reported in: (2007)(120)ECC90
1. These appeals arising from the same Order-in-Original of Commissioner of Customs, Ahmedabad are being disposed off by this common order after hearing both sides.2. Consequent to a letter dated 8.11.1999 by M/s. Jaisu Shipping Co.Pvt. Ltd., Kandla, requesting for issue of port clearance for their vessel MV 'ALNIMS', the Supdt. Customs, Bhavnagar, observed that the said shipping agents had not filed any arrival report for the vessel nor had they delivered IGM. Further enquiry made revealed 25 MTS of HSD oil was cleared from Customs bonded tank vide a ex-bond shipping bill No. 3431 dt. 5.11.99 passed by the Kandla Customs House. The said oil was loaded on the vessel ALNIMS for supply to vessel MV NIRMA.L BHUSHAN as ship store (Bunker). The said HSD oil was unloaded from the vessel without obtaining entry inward and / or entry outward and also will out customs supervision. Statements of various persons were recorded.Vessel MV ALNIMS was seized and a show cause notice was issued seeking...
Marico Industries Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-15-2007
Reported in: (2008)115TTJ(Mum.)497
1. This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order dated 30.3.2006 passed under Section 263 by the learned CIT, Central-30, Mumbai relating to Assessment Year 2001-2002.2. Facts in brief are that the assessment in this case was completed under Section 143(3) on 25.3.2004 on a total income of Rs. 12,57,55,530/- as against the returned income of Rs. 7,91,25,759/-. The assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A) who partially allowed the appeal filed by the assessee vide his order dated 16.12.2004. Subsequently, the learned CIT called for the assessment records for examination and found that the assessment order passed by the Assessing officer is prima facie erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue for the following reasons: 3. The learned CIT found that the assessee has two units one at Kanjikode and the other one at Goa. While Kanjikode unit is eligible for deduction at the rate of 30 per cent, the Goa unit is eligible for 100 per cent deducti...
Osnar Paints and Contractors Pvt. Ltd., a Company Incorporated Under t ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-15-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)BomCR879; [2008]143CompCas139(Bom); [2008]88SCL196(Bom)
N.A. Britto, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel on behalf of both the parties. This petition was filed for the winding up of the respondent company under Section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956 on the allegation that the respondent was indebted to the petitioner in the sum of Rs. 41,48,696.25 as on 15-7-2005 with interest at the rate of 18% per year but the claim is now restricted only to Rs. 20,68,015.70 which is payable to the petitioner as per bill dated 20-4-2004. In other words, the petitioner has abandoned its claim in the sum of Rs. 61,181.25 and Rs. 19,500/- of bills dated 15-4-2004 and 11-5-2004, respectively.2. There is no dispute that the petitioner, a sub-contractor, was entrusted the job of external painting which included the erection of scaffolding, chipping of rust scales prior to blasting followed by fresh water washing etc. of Rig known as Pride Pennsylvania by virtue of two work orders dated 6-12-2003 and an agreement dated 1-1-2004.3. By virtue of the first work order...
Hiralal S/O Laxman Sarve and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-15-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)BomCR188; 2007(6)MhLj162
Naresh H. Patil, J.1. Heard.2. The petitioners were employed as casual labours on different dates under the respondent No. 4 the Assistant Conservator of Forest. The petitioners' initial appointment was for a duration of three months which according to the petitioners was continued from time to time. The petitioners state that after a period of 4 years they approached the industrial Court seeking relief of permanency in service. The complaint was filed by the petitioners before the Industrial Court on 31-3-1989 which was decided in the year 1995. According to the petitioners, the Industrial Court turned down the prayer of the petitioners. The petitioners preferred Writ Petition No. 3212/95 against the decision of the Industrial Court, Jalna. Said writ petition was admitted and under the interim orders of this Court the petitioners were continued in their service. Said writ petition was finally disposed of by an order dt. 22-4-2004. It is stated that the court directed the respondents t...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »