Mumbai Court September 2007 Judgments

S.M. Kamble and ors. Vs. Jt. Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Cidco ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(1)ALLMR692; 2008(1)BomCR695; 2007(6)MhLj890

1. Counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to delete respondent No. 6, the State of Maharashtra which has been joined as a formal party. Leave granted. Respondent No. 6 stands deleted.2. Counsel for the parties handed in the minutes of order signed by the Advocates for the petitioner and by respondent Nos. 1 to 5 individually. Minutes of order are taken on record and marked 'X' for identification. We accept the minutes of order. We however record our reasons for the order.3. Respondent No. 2 is a Co-operative Housing Society, which at the relevant time had about 100 members. Respondent No. 5 has allotted/granted a lease of a plot of land situated at Nerul, Navi Mumbai being Plot No. 11, Sector No. 42-A to the respondent No. 2 for construction of flats for its members. On account of removal of three and resignation of two members of its Managing committee, the strength of the managing committee was reduced to 2, which was less than the quorum for the meetings of the managing committee. R...

Mangala D/O Dinkar Shankar Shellar Vs. Laxman Ganpat Jadhav

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(1)ALLMR769; 2008(1)MhLj244

S.B. Mhase, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the Family Court, Bombay at Bandra in Petition No. A-1239 of 1996, on 26-2-2003 wherein the Family Court partly allowed the petition granting decree that the marriage solemnised between the parties on 4-3-1982 is declared void ab-initio under Section 11 read with Section 5(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. By the said judgment, the prayer of the appellant-petitioner for her maintenance and the maintenance of her son Subodh is rejected. So also the prayer of the petitioner-appellant for granting permanent injunction restraining the respondent from visiting or staying in the premises being Room No. 205, Vishnu Building, N. M. Joshi Marg, Byculla, Mumbai is rejected.2. When this matter appeared for admission the learned Counsel for the respondent-husband raised a preliminary objection in respect of the maintainability of the appeal. The learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that in Marriage Petitio...

Motivala and Natekar Vs. Shantaram N. Wadekar and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(1)BomCR825; [2008(117)FLR46]; 2008(2)MhLj830

Mhatre Nishita, J.1. The petition challenges the award of the Labour Court dated 20.9.1999. By this award the Labour Court has directed the workman to be reinstated with continuity of service with 50% back wages w.e.f. 31.7.1982.2. The main contention of the petitioner is that the Labour Court has misdirected itself while interfering with the punishment imposed by the petitioner on the respondent workman when it had concluded that the findings of the Enquiry Officer are not perverse. According to the petitioner, the Labour Court has reassessed the evidence on record and concluded that the misconduct has not been proved in the manner that the petitioner contend and, therefore, found that the punishment was too severe.3. The 1st respondent workman was employed as a Pattern Maker in 1968 with the petitioner Company. According to the petitioner, the workman remained absent from duty on several occasions for which he was warned by the petitioner. There was no improvement in the record of th...

Situ Electro Instruments (P.) Vs. Ito

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee and is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals)-X, Mumbai 15-6-2004 for the assessment year 2001-02 on the following grounds: 1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not accepting plea and prayer that inasmuch as sum of Rs. 55,98,988 constituted expenditure of a revenue nature expended by the appellant during the impugned previous year in connection with the business of your appellant, the same was fully deductible in the computation of total income under Sections 28, 35, 37 and/or any other applicable provisions of the Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in adverting to irrelevant considerations and/or in not referring to the submissions made before him. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in confirming levy of interest under Section 234B of the Act. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and i...

Bon Limited Vs. Hindustan Liver Employees Union and

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(1)MhLj683

ORDERD.B. Bhosale, J.1. Heard learned senior counsel for the parties. Rule. Learned Advocate for the respondents waive service for the respondents. By consent, rule is made returnable forthwith and heard finally.2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India raises the following questions of law for the consideration of this Court:(i) Whether there could be a reference under Section 10 read with Section 25-O(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 against an order of closure of an undertaking under Section 25-O(2) or it should be solely and exclusively under Section 25-O(5), and can never be referred to a tribunal under Section 10 read with Section 25-O(5)?(ii) Whether after one year, from the date of an order of closing down an undertaking under Section 25-O(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the tribunal adjudicating a reference under Section 10 read with Section 25-O(5) would become functus officio and the adjudication proceedings would stand concluded or...

Asian Paints Limited Vs. Home Solutions Retail (India) Limited

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)109BOMLR1819; LC2007(3)288; 2007(35)PTC697(Bom)

ORDERA.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. This order will dispose of the prayer for ad-interim relief pressed on behalf of the plaintiff to operate during pendency of the Notice of Motion.2. In substance, the plaintiff's case is that the plaintiff company is one of the oldest companies in India and is the pioneer and the market leader in the paint industry engaged, inter alia, in the business of manufacturing and marketing paints, lacquers, varnishes, wall and wood fillers (putties), undercoats for paint in the form of primers, preservatives used to prevent rust and deterioration of wood, thinners, distempers, dry colours, colouring matter, dyestuffs, mordants, natural resins, metal in foil and powder form for painters and decorators, brushes and the like goods since last more than five decades. It is the case of the plaintiff that with a view to provide quality services to its customers under one roof, in the year 2000 commenced offering services in the field of painting through its service provider...

RafiuddIn S/O Quazi Zainul AbedIn Vs. Smt. Saleha Khatoon D/O Yaqub Al ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)109BOMLR2059; 2008(1)MhLj18

C.L. Pangarkar, J. 1. Rule. Returnable forthwith. 2. Heard Finally with consent of parties. 3. This is a revision against the order passed by the Judge, Family Court. 4. The non-applicant in the petition before the family court has preferred this revision application. The respondent herein is the mother of the present applicant Rafiuddin. She was divorced by her husband in the year 1973-74. She submits that she has no source of income and nobody is ready to maintain her and she is living all alone. She claims maintenance from the present applicant. 5. The present applicant resisted the application before the Family Court. He contended that the respondent had sufficient means of maintenance, in as much as she holds large immoveable property. Her husband had given her one time maintenance and since she holds a large property, she is not entitled to claim maintenance. He also submitted that he has very meagre source of income. He has to educate and marry his three daughters. He has to mai...

The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Samarth Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Lt ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)213CTR(Bom)8; [2007]294ITR540(Bom)

J.P. Devadhar, J.1. This appeal is filed by Commissioner of Income Tax, Aurangabad against the order of the ITAT dated 13/1/2006 in ITA No. 564/PN/2005 relating to the assessment year 1995-96.2. The appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law:A) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the advances paid to the harvesting transport contractors was in the nature of business interest of the respondent and not a diversion of borrowed funds for non business purposes, even though such advance was not made in the normal course of business and was made without any specific contractual obligations and such payments were made out of the borrowings on which the respondent was paying higher interest to the financial institutions?B) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that Bakshish payment made by the respondent to the harvesting and transport labourers was ...

Avadhoot Maruti Rao Rane Vs. Deccan Merchants Co-operative Bank Ltd. a ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(6)ALLMR724; 2007(6)MhLj704

Nishita Mhatre, J.1. The petition challenges the order passed by the Labour Court in Complaint (ULP) No. 595 of 1998. The Labour Court had allowed the complaint and directed the respondent bank to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service and full backwages. The Industrial Court has allowed the revision application filed by the respondent and set aside the order of the Labour Court.2. The petitioner was employed with the respondent bank for about 17 years as a cashier. On 25-2-1993 a showcause notice was issued to him alleging that he had misappropriated an amount of Rs. 55000/- on 29-1-1993. Admittedly, the petitioner was not on duty on 29-1-1993. However, when the bank manager opened the cash counter on that day i.e. on 29-1-1993 it was found that there was shortage of cash of Rs. 55000/-. The bank manager visited the residence of the petitioner when he was not present. The relatives of the petitioner paid the amount to the bank manager immediately. On 1-3-1993, the General...

Kec International Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(2)MhLj426

Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. Rule.2. Learned Counsel appearing for the respective respondents waive service. By consent, Rule made returnable forthwith and taken up for final hearing.3. The petitioner is a Company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. According to the petitioner, it is one of the largest Power Transmission EPC companies in the world. The respondent No. 3 on 2nd July, 2007 issued notice inviting tenders being Tender No. CE/DSPC/GFSS-D-T-1/07-08 in respect of Gaothan Feeder Separation Scheme - II to be implemented in seven zones and consequently they invited the bids. The petitioner responded and submitted its tender to the said respondent together with demand drafts towards bid security as contemplated under the terms and conditions of the tender. On 28th August, 2007, respondent No. 3 wrote a letter to the petitioner seeking certain clarification from the petitioner in relation to certain lacuna in compliance to the conditions of the tender. On 30th Au...