Mumbai Court August 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.
Subhash S/O Eknathrao Khandekar and Bharat S/O Eknathrao Khandekar Vs. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-20-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Bom46; 2008(1)MhLj908
V.R. Kingaonkar, J.1. This Second Appeal arises out of judgment rendered by learned IInd Additional District Judge, Latur, allowing appeal (R.C.A.No. 123/1991) preferred by original plaintiff No. 2 -Kantabai. By the impugned judgment, the first appellate Court decreed suit of original plaintiff No. 2 -Kantabai for partition and separate possession as well as for declarations.2. Originally suit (Spl.C.S.No. 123/1985) was filed by original plaintiff No. 1 -Prayagbai and plaintiff No. 2 - Kantabai against deceased defendant No. 1 Manohar and others. They claimed partition and separate possession of two agricultural lands bearing S. No. 250 and S.No. 493 situated at village Nalegaon in Ahmedpur Tahsil. They sought joint 1/3rd share therein. They further sought declaration that compromise decree rendered in previous suit (R.C.S.No. 166/1981) was not binding on their rights, title and interest and so also an exchange deed dated 27.2.1984 executed by defendant No. 5 Trimbak is not binding on ...
Dhule GramIn Vikas Bhajipala Phal Phalawal Va Phule Kharedi Vikri Saha ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-20-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)ALLMR867; 2008(2)BomCR844; 2008(1)MhLj171
Naresh H. Patil, J.1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties.Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties the petition is taken up for final hearing.2. The petitioners initially challenged communications dated 21st July, 2006 and 25th July, 2006 issued by the Collector Mumbai whereby cut off date as 30th June, 2002 was fixed for preparation of list of voters for holding elections to the Managing Committee of respondent No. 4 - Maharashtra State Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited (for short 'the Federation'). The petitioners further prayed for directions to respondents Nos. 3 and 4 to include their names in the list of voters as they have completed 3 years as members of the federal society. This petition was filed on 31-8-2006.3. The petitioners filed Civil Application Stamp No. 3339 of 2007. By the said civil application the petitioners sought to amend the petition and add some prayer clauses. The petitioners prayed in...
Lata @ Latadevi Motising Pardeshi Vs. Education Officer (Primary) and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-20-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALLMR141; 2008(1)MhLj576
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard learned advocate for the petitioner. Also heard learned advocate for the respondents, including respondent No. 5. With the consent of the parties, the petition is heard finally.2. By this petition, the petitioner seeks direction to decide the issue of seniority and to reconsider the order dated 22-3-2007 in the light of judgment of Full Bench of this Court in the case of Vaijnath s/o Tatyarao Shinde v. Secretary Marathwada Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Deogiri College Campus, Aurangabad and Ors. : 2006(6)BomCR804 .3. The petitioner possesses qualification of S.S.C., D.Ed, and is in service of respondent No. 3 society since 1974. According to her, she is permanent employee of respondent No. 3 society and claims that she is seniormost Assistant Teacher in the school run by respondent No. 3 under supervision of respondent No. 2 Board. The post of Head Master/Head Mistress became vacant since 31-1-2007 and, therefore, issue of seniority came up...
Deepak Shankarlal Jaiswal and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-20-2007
Reported in: 2007(6)ALLMR670; 2008(2)BomCR331
Chavan R.C., J.1. Rule. By consent made returnable forthwith.2. Heard learned Advocate Shri P.C. Madkholkar for the petitioners, learned Additional Government Pleader Mrs. Bharati Dangre, for respondents No. 1 to 3, learned Advocate Shri A.S. Kilor for respondents No. 4, 5 and 6 and learned Advocate Shri R.K. Deshpande for respondents No. 7 and 8.3. The petitioners, Municipal Councilors of Municipal Council, Chandrapur had contested election for the post of President and 5 Vice President respectively, were defeated 5 at the election meeting dated 18.12.2006 convened by the Collector and chaired by the Collector's nominee. The petitioners assailed election on the ground that they had contested election as nominees of Shivsena B.J.P. alliance. Shivsena had issued whip directing its councilors to vote for the petitioners. Respondents No. 4, 5 and 6 had been elected to the Municipal Council as candidates belonging to Shiv Sena. They, I however, defied the whip and also are disqualified to ...
Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-17-2007
Reported in: (2008)111ITD190(Mum.)
1. This appeal is filed by the assessee, for the asst. yr. 1996-97. It is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-XXIV at Mumbai dt. 29th Nov., 2002. The appeal arises out of the assessment completed under Section 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961.2. The assessee is a body corporate registered in India under the Companies Act, 1956. It is engaged in the business of providing international telecommunication services in India in terms of a license granted by the Government of India, in the Department of Telecommunication.3. The assessee company has filed its return of income for the impugned asst. yr. 1996-97, declaring a total income of Rs. 600,88,54,056. The said return filed on 30th Nov., 1996 was revised on 16th Dec, 1997 restating the total income at Rs. 577.82 crores. The revised return was initially processed under Section 143(1)(a) resulting in an adjustment of Rs. 33,00,000. The intimation was passed on 19th March, 1998. The return was selected for scrutiny and thereafter an assessme...
Nirmalabai Wd/O Vishnu Pawar Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-17-2007
Reported in: 2009ACJ1073; 2008(1)ALLMR358; 2007(6)MhLj44
A.P. Lavande, J.1. On 26-3-2007 this Court issued notice to the respondents for final disposal of writ petition at the admission stage. Pursuant to the said notice, the respondents have filed their replies. Thereafter the matter was adjourned from time to time. On 9-8-2007 the matter was taken up for final disposal.2. We heard Mr. Joshi, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Deshpande, learned AGP for respondent Nos. 1 and 3. Neither Mr. Jaiswal, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2 nor any representative on behalf of respondent No. 2 remained present.3. In view of order dated 26-3-2007, Rule.4. By this petition, the petitioner challenges communication dated 23-12-2005 addressed to her by respondent No. 2 rejecting the claim of the petitioner to pay compensation amount of Rs. One lac to the petitioner as per insurance coverage,5, Briefly, the facts leading to filing of the present petition are as under:The petitioner is the widow of Vishnu Pawar, an agriculturis...
Sahebrao Tukaram Juware (Convict) Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-17-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ134
D.D. Sinha, J.1. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by the consent of Dr. Mrs. R.K. Shastry, Adv. for the petitioner and Mr. T.A. Mirza, A.P.P. for the respondents.2. This Criminal Writ Petition is directed against the order dt. 24-4-2007 passed by the competent Authority whereby the application of the petitioner for grant of parole leave came to be rejected on the basis of the adverse police report in view of the Rule 4(4) of the Prison (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 hereafter referred to as 'the 1959 Rules'. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner forwarded the application for grant of parole leave on account of illness of his son namely Sandeep Sahebrao Juware through the Superintendent of Prison to the competent Authority i.e. Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur Division, Nagpur on 1-12-2006. It is contended that, at the relevant time, the son of the petitioner has suffered fracture of right hand and since he was in need of proper medical he...
Commissioner of C. Ex. and Customs Vs. Vinay Bele and Associates
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-17-2007
Reported in: 2008[9]STR350
ORDER1. The main contention as urged on behalf of the revenue is that considering Section 76 of the Central Excise Act (sic)(Finance Act, 1994), the authorities had to impose the penalty as set out therein and there was no discretion to impose lesser penalty. After considering Section 80, we find that such a discretion is vested in the authority.2. In the light of that, in our opinion, no substantial question of law arises. Hence, the appeal is dismissed....
Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. Lion Security Services
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-17-2007
Reported in: 2008[9]STR529
ORDER1. The appeal is admitted on the questions of law as formulated in Paragraph 4 of the Appeal memo.2. We find that considering Section 76 of the Central Excise Act read with Section 80, the authority has discretion to interfere with the penalty imposed. Once the discretion had been exercised and no arbitrariness is pointed out, it will not be possible for this Court to interfere.3. In the instant case, we find no case for Interference. Hence, the appeal is dismissed....
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-16-2007
Reported in: (2008)9STR200
1. This stay application is directed against confirmation of demand of service tax Rs. 2,68,58,587/- and equivalent penalty.2. Considered the submission made by both sides and perused the record.The demand has arisen on the ground that the appellants had not paid service tax liable to be paid on public telephones and coin box system.3. On perusal of the record, it is seen that BSNL entered into agreement with private parties for installation of coin box for local telephone operating system. This particular operation is covered by exemption Notification No. 3/94-ST dated 30.06.1994 which exempts taxable services of "guaranteed public telephones operating only for local calls." The findings of the Commissioner for confirmation of demand seem to be presumptuous. On perusal of the order, we find s that there is no evidence on record to come to the conclusion that guaranteed public telephones operating only for local calls, is not covered under the exemption. Second issue regarding telepho...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »