Mumbai Court April 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.
Nandkumar Mahadeo Dengane Vs. Bhavika Vidya Prasarak Mandal and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)ALLMR126; (2008)110BOMLR1228
B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. All these petitions are directed against the judgments and orders rendered by the School Tribunal on 13th August 2007, thereby rejecting the appeals filed by the petitioners -teachers. Before the School Tribunal, the orders of dismissal by way of punishment were challenged and these orders arose from mainly a common incident of distribution of leaflets in the school premises and the relay fast on 15th and 16th May 2006 held in the premises of the Zilla Parishad office and in which the petitioners along with some of their dismissed colleagues had participated and, therefore, all these petitions are being decided by a common order. 2. All the petitioners except the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 8861 of 2007, were Assistant Teachers in the primary section of Bhavika Vidyalaya run by the respondent no.1 -Society and the petitioner in Writ Petition No.8861 of 2007 was the Assistant Teacher in the secondary section of the said school. They were all confirmed teachers ...
Abdul Majid Tinwalla Brother of the Detenu AmIn Abdul Karim Tinwala Vs ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: (2008)110BOMLR1344
Bilal Nazki, J.1. This is a petition filed by the brother of the detenu, who is detained by the Detaining Authority by an Order of Detention dated 29th August, 2007 under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 ('COFEPOSA Act', for short). The order was executed on 4th December, 2007. The grounds were served on the detenu immediately on his detention.2. The brief facts, which led to passing of the Order of Detention against the detenu, were that on the basis of intelligence inputs received by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, they had, on 15th December, 2006, apprehended the detenu at the Shivaji International Airport, Sahara, Mumbai. They had questioned the detenu, and on inquiry, they had found that the detenu was travelling from Mumbai to Sharjah and was in possession of foreign currency equivalent to 2.31 lakhs Indian currency. The said currency had not been declared to the Customs Authority. He also ejected two rolls, which were...
Balbhim Ramchandra Kedar, Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Ma ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: (2008)110BOMLR1324; 2008CriLJ3249
Naresh H. Patil, J.1. This is a reference made under Section 15(2) of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971 by Shri. Balbhim Ramchandra Kedar, Civil Judge Junior Division & Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhusawal, District Jalgaon dated 11-5-2007. By an order dated 19-6-2007 Shri. V.N. Damle, learned Counsel was appointed as amicus curiae and notice was issued to respondent No. 2 as to why action under Contempt of Courts Act be not taken against the contemner. The contemner was directed to remain personally present in this Court on 16-7-2007. By an order dated 13th August 2007 the contempt petition was admitted and it was set down for hearing on 1-10-2007.2. By an order dated 28th February 2008 charge was framed against the contemner, a practising Advocate, in the presence of the contemner. The contemner denied the charge against him and pleaded not guilty. The first charge against the contemner is that on 10-7-2006 at Bhusawal the contemner had already filed a criminal complaint bearing C...
Vilas Vithalrao Takale Vs. Jaya-hind Industries Ltd. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)ALLMR301; 2009(1)BomCR385; 2008(5)MhLj216
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. The challenge in these proceedings under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is to the orders passed by the Labour Court on 3rd June, 1994 and 20th May, 1995 in a complaint of unfair labour practices and an order dated 16th October, 1996 passed by the Industrial Court in revision.2. The petitioner was employed as a junior clerk with the First respondent since 13th January, 1972. Two charge-sheets were issued to the petitioner by the management - the first dated 3rd June, 1991 in respect of an incident which was alleged to have taken place on 29th May, 1991 and the second dated 29th October, 1991 in respect of an incident which is alleged to have taken place on 28th September, 1991. The allegations in the first charge-sheet issued were to the following effect:On 29th May, 1991 when you were in the General Shift, you were asked by your department head to show him whether the PLA and RG 23 registers were updated. You replied that there was a backlog of 2 days a...
Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Sec. Education and anr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: [2008(118)FLR134]; (2008)IIILLJ277Bom
R.C. Chavan, J.1. These appeals by the Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education, Amravati are directed against the orders passed by the learned Judge, Labour Court, Amravati in respondent's complaint of unfair labour practice, confirmed in revision by the learned Member, Industrial Court, Amravati, as well as learned single Judge of this Court in Writ Petitions filed by the appellants against the said orders.2. The respondents/complainants claimed to be engaged by the appellant Board as peons on daily wages. They had completed required number of days of continuous service. They alleged that yet the appellant board terminated their services without any reasons and without complying with the provisions of Section 25-F and 25-G of the Industrial Disputes Act. The complainants further allege that after termination of their services the appellant Board engaged new employees in violation of the provisions of Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act and thus, ind...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shaheda ParvIn AllauddIn Kazi and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: 2006ACJ2734; 2008(5)MhLj689
R.M. Borde, J.1. The only point that arises for consideration in the matter is whether the insurance company is liable to pay compensation in respect of an insurance policy which is of the nature of trade policy/transit policy and whether the risk of occupant travelling in a passenger vehicle is covered in view of such insurance policy more specifically when the vehicle was being carried from manufacturer to a dealer.2. The facts giving rise to the appeal can be summarized in nutshell thus:Respondent Nos. 1 to 7 are the original claimants. On 31-7-1999 deceased Allauddin Kazi, a police inspector was travelling from Dhule to Shirpur for attending his duty by Mahindra Armada Jeep bearing No. MP 15 TR H 893. A goods truck bearing registration No. MP14 B 4714 was parked in stationary condition on the road. The jeep gave dash to the said stationary truck from behind as a result of which Allauddin Kazi suffered serious injuries and died. The jeep belongs to Mahindra and Mahindra Company resp...
Kasturchand Fulchand and ors. Vs. Baburao Rambhau Sonar (Died Through ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)MhLj794
R.M. Borde, J.1. This is an appeal by the original plaintiffs raising challenge to the judgment and decree passed by the Jt. Civil Judge, Jr. Dn., Kannad in Regular Civil Suit No. 94/76 on 28-8-1976 which has been confirmed by the 3rd Additional District Judge, Aurangabad in Regular Civil Appeal No. 281/86 by judgment delivered on 20-12-1990.2. The plaintiffs instituted a suit seeking declaration that the order passed by the Tahsildar/Special officer in File No. 75/MAG, dt. 23-7-1976 directing the plaintiffs to handover the possession of the suit house bearing Municipal No. 1822 situated at Kannad as invalid, illegal and in excess of the jurisdiction conferred on the authority. The defendant had tendered an application before the Special Officer appointed under the provisions of Maharashtra Debt Relief Act, 1975 for releasing of the house property which is said to have been mortgaged in favour of grand father of the plaintiffs. It is contended that by virtue of mortgage transaction ent...
The Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. Sona Properties Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-07-2008
Reported in: (2008)110BOMLR1128; (2008)216CTR(Bom)217
F.I. Rebello, J.1. All these appeals are being disposed of by this common order as the questions of law in issue are the same. The question of law as framed on behalf of Revenue reads as under:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in holding that the Assessing Officer was not justified in re-opening the Assessment on the basis of the valuation report of obtain by him subsequent to the date of completion of assessment?The learned I.T.A.T. in the appeals preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioners (Appeals) dismissed the same by a common order, being W.T.A. No. 806 to 810/Mum/98 for the assessment year 1988/89 to 1992/93. As there are differences on facts, we will briefly set out the relevant facts in each of the appeals.2. W.T.A. No. 188 of 2004 is in respect of the assessment year 1988-89. In that case return of Wealth was filed on 29.7.1988. The assessment under Section 16(1) was made on 27.3.1992. The ...
Tajudding M. Somji Vs. Jivrai Raoji Gandhi and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-07-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ALLMR351; IV(2008)BC287; 2008(3)BomCR552
Mhatre Nishita, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the proceedings in Criminal Case No. 14 of 1991 and the order passed on 22.3.1999 rejecting the application filed by the accused for recalling process issued on 1.2.1991.2. The petitioner had issued a cheque in favour of respondent No. 1 on 3.12.1990. The cheque was dishonoured on 18.12.1990 with a remark 'funds expected, present later'. Respondent No. 1, therefore, presented the cheque again on 20.12.1990. It was dishonoured again on 2.1.1991 with the remark 'drawer has stopped payment.'3. Respondent No. 1 then issued notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on 16.1.1991 calling upon the petitioner to pay the amount with interest within 15 days from the receipt of the notice. The petitioner received the notice on 19.1.1991. Respondent No. 1 filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on 31.1.1990. The process was issued on 1.2.1999. The petitioner filed an application for withdrawal of the p...
V.L.T. Cargo Movers (P.) Ltd. Vs. Ajit Kumar S. Puri and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-07-2008
Reported in: [2008(118)FLR426]; (2008)IIILLJ1035Bom
Abhay S. Oka, J.1. The submissions of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties were heard on April 1, 2008. However, the judgment was not immediately delivered with a view to give an opportunity to the parties to settle the dispute amicably. The learned Counsel appearing for the parties have today stated that there is no possibility of amicable settlement. Hence I am proceeding to deliver the judgment.2. By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-employer has taken an exception to the judgment and Award dated June 7, 2007 passed by the 3rd Labour Court, Bombay. With a view to appreciate the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, it will be necessary to briefly refer to the facts of the case.3. According to the case of the 1st respondent, he was employed by the petitioner as a senior Clerk since May, 1979. It is alleged by the 1st respondent that he was in continuous service prior to illegal termination allegedly made...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »