Mumbai Court March 2008 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.
Rastriya Sakhar Kamgar Union through It's General Secretary, Anandrao ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ALLMR223; 2008(3)BomCR567; (2008)110BOMLR784; 2008(6)MhLj291
R.M. Savant, J.1. The dispute in the present Petition, is as regards the nominations of two persons on the Board of Directors of the Respondent No. 5 Co-operative Society in terms of Section 73BB of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act').2. The factual matrix involved in the present Petition is stated thus:The Respondent No. 5, Sangamner Bhag Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Amrutnagar, Sangamner is a Co-operative Society registered under the provisions of the said Act. In terms of Section 73BB of the said Act, two nominees of the workers, are to be co-opted on the Board of Directors of the Respondent No. 5 Sugar factory. This is on the basis of the strength of the Board of Directors. The elections to the Board of Directors of the Respondent No. 5 Sugar factory took place sometime in the year 2005. After the said elections, the Managing Director of the Respondent No. 5, Sugar factory addressed a letter dated 26.2.2005 to the Petitioner...
Heat Shrink Technologies Limited, Earlier Known as Repl Engineering Li ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)BomCR580
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. IIT Capital Services Limited, a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, with its registered office at 61, Bombay Samachar Marg, Bombay, filed a petition under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', praying for winding up of REPL Engineering Limited, also a Company registered under the Companies Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Company'. The relief was sought on the premise that for valuable consideration Avon Plastics Private Limited drew the bills of exchange aggregating to Rs. 1,00,50,644/- in favour of the petitioners during the period 14th March, 1997 to 19th June, 1997. The presentment, protest and notice of dishonour were waived by the parties. The said bills of exchange were drawn in connection with the sale of goods which were accepted by the Company. The Company duly accepted and confirmed that they would honour the said bills of exchange on due date vide letters exchanged...
Shramik Utkarsha Sabha a Trade Union Registered Under the Trade Unions ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)BomCR770; (2008)IIILLJ167Bom
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. The petitioner in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the order dated 19th December, 2007, passed by the Member, Industrial Court, in Application (MRTU) No. 12 of 2003.2. The petitioner is a trade union registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926 and is also a recognised union under Section 12 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. Respondent No. 1 which is a Company duly registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, has its undertaking at Goregaon (East), Mumbai. Respondent No. 2 is also a trade union registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926. Respondent No. 2 made an application before the Industrial Court under Section 14 of the Act alleging that it has the majority membership of the employees working in the undertaking of respondent No. 1 and, therefore, it should be registered as a recognized union fo...
Vijay Kumar Gupta, Sanjay Transport Service, Well Water Suppliers Vs. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ALLMR240; 2008(3)BomCR593; 2008(4)MhLj370
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard parties.1. Prelude Vijay Kumar Gupta, sole proprietor of M/s. Sanjay Transport Service, has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the legality, propriety and validity of the contract awarded to M/s. Lirin Roadlines Pvt. Ltd., respondent No. 2, vide Government Resolution No. WPP 2003/CR-177/YSS2 dated 1st September, 2006. This contract, according to the petitioner, has been awarded through private negotiations without inviting tenders and in an arbitrary manner. Such awarding of contract is unconstitutional, violative of principles of governance and contrary to the constitutional mandate contained in Article 299 of the Constitution of India. It denies fair competition amongst similarly placed persons who hold similar qualifications like respondent No. 2 for performing the function to lift water from the Government owned wells and distribute the same at a much higher amount than what...
Suresh Bhagwandas Rajpal Vs. Union Bank of India, a Body Corporate Con ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ALLMR363; IV(2008)BC239; 2008(3)MhLj896
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed as under:(a) a Writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the Hon'ble DRT II, and the Respondents to act judicially, and as per the provisions of law;(b) a Writ in the nature of `certiorari' calling for all the records of and documents relating to the impugned order from the Hon'ble Mumbai DRT II, to set aside the impugned order, after satisfying about its illegality and invalidity.(c) a Writ of prohibition be issued directing the Hon'ble DRT II, not to;(i) proceed further on the basis of the impugned order, or(ii) issue fresh orders based on RP No. 193 of 2006 arising out of the said impugned order filed by the Respondent either against the Petitioner either in his personal capacity or against the Assets owned by him until such time the present Petition is heard and finally disposed off.(d) That the Petitioner be granted such further and other relief as may be deemed ...
Shri Vile Parle Kelavani Mandal, a Society Registered Under the Societ ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ALLMR397; (2008)110BOMLR872; 2008(4)MhLj413
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard parties.2. Petitioner No. 1, a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1960, and also a public charitable trust registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950, is running the managements of SVKM's Dwarkadas J. Sahghvi College of Engineering and SVKM's Dr. Bhanuben Nanavati College of Pharmacy at Mumbai, petitioner Nos. 2 and 3. Both these educational institutions are affiliated to the University of Mumbai, respondent No. 4. These educational institutions are being run after obtaining approval from Respondent No. 3 Director of Technical Education. Both these institutions claim that they are Gujarati Linguistic Minority unaided educational institutions and in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the cases of (i) T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka : AIR2003SC355 , (ii) Islamic Academic Education v. State of Karnataka : AIR2003SC3724 , and (iii) P.A. Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra 20...
Minoo Rustomji Shroff and ors. Vs. Dali Kavasji Gai and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALLMR100; 2008(3)BomCR16; 2008(4)MhLj71
Bhatia J.H., J.1. The applicants had filed three Applications against the respondents in these 3 Revision Applications under Section 13-A(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947 (hereinafter for short, 'the Bombay Rent Act'). The Competent Authority heard the evidence in Application No. 80 of 1995 and dismissed the same on merits. Against dismissal of that application No. 80/1995, Revision Application No. 1254 of 2001 is filed. The other two Applications, being Application No. 81/1995 and No. 56/1995, were dismissed holding that in view of the evidence given in Application No. 80/95, the Competent Authority had no jurisdiction and the preliminary issue under Section 9-A of C.P.C. was decided against the applicants. Against the orders in those two matters, Revision Application No. 1255 of 2001 and 1256 of 2001 respectively are filed by the original applicants before this Court. In view of these circumstances, all these three Revision Applications may be...
Pashamiya S/O Khajamiya Attar Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ALLMR770; 2008(6)BomCR248; 2008(3)MhLj149
P.V. Hardas, J.1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission.2. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India lays a challenge to the order passed by the respondent-Scrutiny Committee validating the caste certificate issued to the 6th respondent as belonging to Bagwan - Other Backward Caste.3. We need not dilate much on the factual aspect of the case in the light of the submission which has been made before us by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the respondent-Scrutiny Committee is a quasi-judicial authority and it is incumbent for the respondent-Scrutiny Committee to give some reasons while validating the caste claim of the 6th respondent. It is urged before us that the order of the respondent-Scrutiny Committee validating the caste claim of the 6th respondent is bereft of any reasons. W...
Ashok Arjanbhai Jolia and anr. Vs. Chief Executive Officer and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)BomCR564
Kumar Swatanter, C.J.1. This is the fourth time that the petitioners have been compelled to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Obviously, some callousness on the part of the officials of the respondents and the builder/developer has resulted in this repeated litigation between the parties which, in our view, could have been conveniently avoided, particularly, in view of the stand taken by the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (hereinafter to be referred to as 'SRA') even before the Court.2. Necessary facts are that the petitioners have started their business of flour mill in the old premises at Kulupwadi at Borivali with effect from 3rd January, 1977. In the year 2001, petitioners were held eligible for residential-cum-commercial structure by the Secretary, SRA as entitled to the property 'Annexure II'. A notice was served upon the petitioners by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai under Section 314 of the Act for removal of the premises in question...
Hemdas Premdas Ranbakuda and ors. Vs. Smt. Surajbai D/O Dhansao Sahu a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ALLMR765; 2008(4)BomCR669; 2008(3)MhLj293
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. The original plaintiff has challenged the judgment and decree dated 22-4-1992 delivered by the Additional District Judge, Bhandara in Regular Civil Appeal No. 128/1990. The said appeal was filed by the present respondent No. 1 Smt. Surajbai challenging the judgment and decree dated 20-8-1985 delivered by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Sakoli in Regular Civil Suit No. 189/1981 whereby the suit filed by the original appellant came to be decreed. The original appellant has expired during the pendency of the appeal and on 20-2-1998 his legal heirs 1 (A) to 1(E) have been brought on record. The Appellant No. 1(C) Babudas expired on 24-6-2007 and his legal heirs one Hemin and Dharamdas filed Civil Application No. 1916/2008 for coming on record. The application is within time and it has not been opposed by other side, hence the same is allowed. Necessary amendment be carried out within three days.2. The original appellant Premdas, filed Regular Civil Suit for decla...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »