Mumbai Court July 2007 Judgments

Vaijantabai Devidas Khandare Vs. Janardhan Fakirchand Khandare and anr ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2007Bom193; 2007(5)ALLMR731; 2007(4)BomCR497; 2007(6)MhLj518

Savant R.M., J.1. Rule; made returnable forthwith and heard with the consent of the parties.2. This Revision Application filed by the petitioner above named takes exception to the order dated 22.2.1999 passed by the II Additional District Judge, Parbhani. By the said order the Appeal filed by the respondent No. 1 was allowed and the Succession certificate was directed to be issued in the name of the appellant i.e. Janardhan. The above Civil Revision Application was filed on 5.6.2000, ad interim relief came to be granted on 12.4.2007 as the delay in filing the Civil Revision Application was condoned only in the year 2007. The learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 is not in a position to make a statement as to whether the respondent No. 1 has taken any steps pursuant to the issue of the succession certificate in his favour in respect of the debts and securities of the deceased Devidas.3. The facts involved in the Revision are briefly stated thus:(I) The respondent No. 1 herein filed M...

Acharya Donde Shikshan Prasarak Mandal and ors. Vs. Vitthal D. Kamble ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(6)BomCR232; [2007(115)FLR213]; (2008)ILLJ240Bom; 2007(5)MhLj99

Nishita Mhatre, J.1. The Petition challenges the order of the School Tribunal dated 1-11-1997 by which the school Tribunal has held that respondent No. 1 is entitled to be reinstated in service with full backwages.2. Respondent No. 1 was employed with petitioner No. 2 school. He was appointed as a Peon from 1979. After the academic year 1983-84 it was found that respondent No. 1 often remained absent from work. It appears that from 1-7-1990 to 9-7-1990 he worked during the days when the school was open and thereafter he refused to report for duty. The muster rolls indicate that respondent No. 1 signed the muster roll on 2-7-1990, 5-7-1990, 6-7-1990 and 7-7-1990. 1st July was a Sunday while 3rd and 4th July were holidays for the school. 8th July was again a Sunday.3. It appears that respondent No. 1 filed an appeal being Appeal No. 137 of 1993 before the School Tribunal. This appeal was filed on 2-4-1993. Respondent No. 1 contended in this appeal that the school had terminated his servi...

Mula Education Society and anr. Vs. Haribhau S/O Jagannath Kardile and ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2008(116)FLR475]; 2007(6)MhLj492

N.V. Dabholkar, J.1. By this appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, appellants (henceforth referred to as the 'management' for the sake of brevity) desires to challenge order dated 12-7-2000 passed by learned Single Judge of this High Court in Writ Petition No. 1040/2000. The learned Single Judge was pleased to reject the writ petition filed by the management at the threshold. The writ petition was filed by the management thereby challenging the order passed by Pune/Shivaji University and College Tribunal, in Appeal No. 21/1998 (P). By the said order, the learned Member of the Tribunal held that termination of respondent No. 1 (henceforth referred to as the 'teacher' for the sake of brevity) with effect from 17-1-1998 was otherwise i.e. otherwise than due process of law or procedure as prescribed by university statutes. Consequently, the learned Member ordered the management to reinstate the teacher and pay the arrears of salary from 17-1-1998 till the date of reinstatement. Thi...

Barbeil Khimji Shah Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(6)MhLj468

V.C. Daga, J.1. The applicant has invoked jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('Cr.P.C.' for short) with a prayer to quash and set aside the complaint and proceedings initiated thereunder being Criminal Case No. 13/S/86 pending on the file of the learned Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, 44th Court, Andheri.The Factual Matrix:2. The factual matrix reveals that in or about 1980, the applicant Shri Babulal Khimji Shah and respondent No. 2 entered into an agreement for sale of certain immovable properties situate in the locality known as Virar, district-Thane. It is the case of the complainant that he came in contact with the accused sometime in the month of August, 1980 and on representation made by him, complainant entered into an agreement with him to purchase the property admeasuring about 4 acres situate near Virar Railway Station, district-Thane. The applicant-accused thereafter, sold the very same property to one M/s Paranjape Buil...

Hdfc Chubb General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shantidevi Rajbalsingh Thaku ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008ACJ1280

Roshan Dalvi, J.1. The appellant, which is an insurance company, has challenged the judgment dated 16.6.2006 of the Member of M.A.C.T., Thane, granting compensation of Rs. 4,12,500 to respondent No. 1 herein with interest thereon at 6 per cent per annum along with costs and directing investment of a part of the amount.2. The order of compensation came to be passed in an application of respondent No. 1 who was the mother of the deceased driver of a motor cycle against her husband, who was the owner of the motor cycle and against the appellant insurance company on the ground that the husband was bound to compensate the wife for the death of her son, the victim of the accident and that the liability had to be indemnified by the appellant insurance company since the vehicle was insured with them. The accident took place on 28.6.2004. The deceased is stated to have been earning a gross sum of Rs. 4,000 p.m. out of which Rs. 3,000 was shown to be by way of his salary and Rs. 1,000 by way of ...

Mahindra Ugine Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009[13]STR214

ORDER1. On behalf of the respondents the learned counsel has raised an objection that an appeal would not lie before this Court as the appeal pertains to valuation.2. The appellant before this court has formulated the questions of law in para 23. From the questions formulated in the appeal memo, it is clear that the appeal proceeds on the footing that even if the sale price of the scrap is to be added to the value of the components, there is still an excess payment. The appellants pointed out that in this very case the Supreme Court passed an order 2006 (203) E.L.T. 184 (S.C.) directing appointment of Cost Accountant from the panel of the department of Revenue and he would look into accounts of the appellant. Considering the grounds urged before the tribunal and before this court we are of the opinion that the substantial questions of law raised in the appeal do not pertain to valuation.3. The learned Counsel for the respondent relied on the Judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of...

Garware-wall Ropes Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)(121)ECC75

1. This appeal is directed against the order-in-appeal No.P-II/033/2006 dated 22/02/2006.2. The issue involved in this case is regarding the interest payable to the appellants on the application for rebate of the amount of duty paid on the goods exported by the appellants. The appellants had filed rebate claim on 17/11/99, which was rejected by the adjudicating authority. On an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal and directed the lower authorities to sanction rebate claim. The refund on the rebate claim was given to the appellants on 30/04/2004. The appellant's claim for rebate was approved by the first appellate authority vide order-in-appeal dated 12/11/2003. Subsequently, the appellants vide their letter dated 03/02/04 sought the amount of rebate claim as allowed by the first appellate authority and also sought interest on the amount vide that order. The appellants filed an interest claim for the period from 17/11/99 to 30/04/2004. The lower authorities sanctioned...

Laxmi Organic Industries Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)(120)ECC510

1. This appeal is directed against the order-in-appeal No. AT/239 & 240/RGD/2006 dated 31.3.2006/8.5.06.2. Considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records.3. The issue involved in this case is regarding the denial of modvat credit on the inputs, which were sent out by the appellant to be used as denaturant Ethyl Alcohol and the said denatured Ethyl Alcohol is brought back to the appellant's factory and consumed for their manufacturing. Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has held against the appellants on the following finding: I have gone through the case records and considered the rival contentions. The only short question involved in the appeal is, whether it was necessary that inputs be used within the factory of production, when credit was being availed on them and whether use outside the factory will take them out of the definition of inputs. The matter is squarely covered by the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in CCE Jaipur v. J.K. Udaipur Udyog 4. From the a...

Cheminova India Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Cit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. The assessee has filed the present Miscellaneous application seeking rectification of the order passed by this Tribunal on 31-8-2006 in department's appeal bearing ITA No. 1948/ Mum./2003 for assessment year 1998-99 on the ground that the said order discloses certain mistakes apparent from record which, according to the assessee, need correction.2. Briefly stated, the f acts of the case are that the assessee had written off a sum of Rs. 23,93,882 as bad debts under the head "Project advances", i.e., the advances given to various parties for purchase of plant and machinery and other expenses relating to the new project being set up by the assessee. The assessee had also written back a sum of Rs. 8,75,799. Thus the net write off under the head "Project advances" amounted to Rs. 15,18,083. It was the case of the assessee before the assessing officer that the aforesaid amounts were given to the various parties in connection with the new project being set up by the assessee. It was also...

Nandkishor S/O Gangaram Dhudkekar Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Ministry o ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2007Bom186; 2007(5)ALLMR217; 2007(4)BomCR519; 2008(1)MhLj349

B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks consideration of his application at Annexure-A for being appointed as Notary under the provisions of the Notaries Act, 1952. He has also contended that the respondents must be directed to frame appropriate policy or guidelines for making selection of candidates for being appointed as a Notary.2. The petitioner states that on 11/6/2003, he submitted an application for being appointed as a Notary for Malegaon area in which he is practicing as Advocate. The petitioner contends that said application is pending without any consideration even today. By inviting attention to the facts pleaded, the argument is, in the absence of any fixed policy or guidelines regulating such appointment the respondents are resorting to pick and choose. Persons who have applied subsequently have been appointed in Nagpur region. Our attention has also been invited to the provisions of the Notaries ...