Mumbai Court October 2009 Judgments

Yair Daniel Lavon Vs. the State of Goa Through Anti Narcotic Police

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(111)BomLR4573

N.A. Britto, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the accused who has been convicted and sentenced under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 Act, for short) in Special Criminal Case No. 8/2008 by Judgment dated 19-1-2009.2. The raid in this case was conducted by Police Inspector Suraj Halarnkar/PW7 of ANC Police Station, Panaji on 8-1-2008 on the basis of prior information and the accused was arrested and subsequently a charge-sheet was filed against the accused.3. The accused was charged and tried with the allegation that on 8-1-2008 between 10.45 to 13.45 hours behind Badem Church, Assagao, the accused was found in illegal possession of 1.765 gms of charas, possession of which he could not account, thereby committing an offence punishable under Section 8(c) r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the said Act. To prove its case, the prosecution examined seven witnesses.4. The case of the accused was that a false case was filed against him and he was taken from his residence at 7.00 a.m....

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Orient (Goa) Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2009)227CTR(Bom)109; [2009]185TAXMAN131(Bom)

S.B. Deshmukh, J.1. This appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law by this Court, by an order passed on 8.8.2005:(A) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in holding that in view of circular issued by the CBDT, disallowance under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act was not warranted ?(B) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to claim deduction of the demurrage charges of Rs. 1,08,53,980/-paid to Foreign company, without deducting tax on it, under Section 40(a)(i) of the IT Act, in view of the circular No. 723 dated 19.9.95, issued by the CBDT ?(C) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to claim deduction of the demurrage charges of Rs. 1,08,53,980/-payable to Foreign Shipping Company on which tax has not been deducted, in view of the provisions of Section 172(8) introduced by the Finance Act, 1997 with retrospective effect from 1.4....

Rajkumar S/O Shivlingrao Gaulkar Vs. the State of Maharashtra Through ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(111)BomLR4679

Naresh H. Patil, J.1. The petitioner contends that he belongs to Jangam, Other Backward Class. A caste certificate to this effect was issued on 20th March 1995 by the Taluka Executive Magistrate, Ahmedpur. The said caste certificate was sent for verification and the Caste Scrutiny Committee, respondent No. 2 herein, validated the caste claim of the petitioner as Jangam, Other Backward Class.2. The petitioner contends that he had earlier applied for caste certificate as belonging to Mala Jangam, a Scheduled Caste. He was issued such a certificate on 18th July 1979 by the Executive Magistrate, Ahmedpur.3. The petitioner contested the elections to the Zilla Parishad against a seat reserved for the backward class of citizens along with several candidates including respondent No. 4 - Navnath Ramrao Kotsulwar. The petitioner got elected to the Zilla Parishad from Hadolati Circle. A complaint was filed by respondent No. 4 dated 21-3-2002 to the Returning Officer alleging that the petitioner w...

Liberal Education Society Through Its President Shri Shripati Parshura ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2010(1)MhLj491

R.C. Chavan, J.1. This petition by Management is directed against the order passed by the learned Presiding Officer of the School Tribunal, Nagpur allowing the respondent No. 1s appeal against termination of her services on 3rd of May, 1993 and directing the petitioner to reinstate respondent No. 1.2. When the petition was admitted ad interim relief in terms of prayer Clause (ii) was granted namely, staying the order of the School Tribunal and therefore, presumably respondent No. 1 has not been reinstated.3. Facts which are material for deciding this petition are as under:The respondent No. 1 was first appointed as an Assistant Teacher from 1st August, 1992 to 28th September, 1992 in a leave vacancy of one Shri L.L. Nakhale. Said Shri L.L. Nakhale retired on 30th September, 1992. Therefore, respondent No. 1 was continued from 1-10-1992 till the end of academic session 1992-1993. These appointments were approved by the Education Officer by his orders dated 23-2-1993 and 28-9-1993. The p...

Kavita Chandraprakash Goel Vs. State of Maharashtra Through Its Secret ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2010(1)BomCR352; 2010(1)MhLj470

Ranjana Desai, J.1. Rule. Respondents waive service. By consent of the parties taken up for hearing forthwith.2. The petitioner claims to belong to Chamar caste by birth which is recognized as Scheduled Caste in the State of Maharashtra. In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner is seeking quashing of order dated 3/1/08 passed by the Scrutiny Committee, Mumbai Division ('Scrutiny Committee' for short) with further direction to the Scrutiny Committee to issue certificate of validity in respect of caste certificate dated 5/8/04 issued by the Deputy Collector, Thane. The petitioner has prayed for a declaration that caste certificate dated 5/8/04 issued in her favour is valid, legal and subsisting. The petitioner has also sought directions to respondents 3 and 4 to handover B Tech degree to her and to release her mark sheets to her.3. The petitioner was born on 19/3/1986 at Mulund, Mumbai. She was admitted to the Omkar English Medium School, Dombi...

Bashir Ahmed Chand Shaikh Through His Constituted Power of Attorney Ho ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2010(1)MhLj500

Ranjana Desai, J.1. In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed that order dated 15/11/2007 passed under Section 34 of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short, 'the U.L.C. Act') by the Government of Maharashtra be set aside.2. The case of the petitioner:(a) The petitioner owns land being Gat No. 458 (part) at Mauje Moshi, Taluka Haveli, District Pune, admeasuring about 23000 sq. meters (for convenience, 'the said land'). Respondent 1 is the State Government, which is the appellate as well as the revisional authority under the U.L.C. Act. Respondent 2 is the Competent Authority created under the U.L.C. Act.(b) On 12/7/1976, the U.L.C. Act was promulgated. In 1999, the petitioner filed an application before the Competent Authority i.e. respondent 2 praying for a declaration that the provisions of the U.L.C. Act were not applicable to the said land and for necessary certificate to that effect. By order da...

The State of Maharashtra, Vs. Shri Murarao Malojirao Ghorpade,

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(6)MhLj788

Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. The State of Maharashtra enacted the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), primarily with an object to give effect to the State policy so that the operation of the economic system does not result in the concentration of wealth and means of production to the common detriment as well as to ensure the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are so distributed as best to subserve the common good. The Directive Principles of State policy contained under Part IV of the Constitution of India had attained a different significance and legal stature of the Directive Principles was uplifted by the 25th Amendment Act, 1971 of the Constitution. Article 31C of the Constitution states that, notwithstanding anything contained in Article 13, no law giving effect to the policy of the State towards securing all or any of the principles laid down in Part IV shall be deemed to be void on the gr...

Mirabai W/O Trimbak Patil and Dagdu S/O Trimbak Patil Vs. Smt. Anusaya ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2010(1)MhLj826

S.S. Shinde, J.1. This Writ Petition takes exception to the Order dated 15/4/2005 passed by the Additional District Judge at Shahada below Exh. 32 in R.C.A. No. 27 of 2001.2. The background facts of the case are as under:The petitioners herein are the original defendants in R.C.S. No. 14 of 2000 filed by the plaintiff Anusayabai in the Court of the Civil Judge (S.D.) at Shahada for partition and separate possession of the agricultural lands and the house property.The petitioners herein filed Written Statement and resisted the suit claim. According to the petitioners, who are the original defendants, plaintiff Anusayabai has got no concern with the husband of defendant No. 1 namely Trimbak Shamala Patil. It is specifically averred that, the plaintiff was not the wife of said Trimbak and as such there is no question of consideration of the joint family.The plaintiff Anusayabai herself stepped into witness box and deposed at Exh. 31. In her deposition, she stated that, one Sayankalabai wa...

Plastiblends India Limited a Company Incorporated Under the Companies ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(111)BomLR4592; (2009)227CTR(Bom)1; [2009]318ITR352(Bom); 2010(1)MhLj526; [2009]185TAXMAN187(Bom)

J.P. Devadhar, J.1. This appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (`Act' for short) was initially heard by a Division Bench of this Court and by an order dated 19-12-2008, the said Division Bench requested the learned Chief Justice to constitute a Larger Bench to consider the following question of law:Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, for the purposes of availing allowable special deduction under Chapter VI-A of the Income-tax Act, the gross total income is required to be computed by deducting allowable depreciation even though the assessee had disclaimed the same for the purposes of regular assessment 2. On the above question of law, the Division Bench observed that there are conflicting decisions rendered by the two Division Benches of this Court in the case of Grasim Industries Limited v. C.I.T. reported in : 245 I.T.R. 677 (Bom) and in the case of Scoop Industries (P) Limited v. Income Tax Officer reported in : 289 I.T.R. 195 (Bom). The Divisio...

Torrent Power Ltd., Vs. Mr. Hafis Abdul Salam Bhaddis Ahmed

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Oral Order:- Per Shri P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member This Revision Petition is directed against the ad-interim order passed by the District Consumer Forum, Thane in consumer complaint No.618/2009 dated 19/09/2009 whereby after filing complaint, Forum below entertained immediately the Interim Relief Application filed by the complainant/respondent herein and passed on the same date ex-parte order directing org. O.P. to restore connection to the premises of the complainant at Bhiwandi on complainant depositing 1/3 amount from two bills, which were given to him for current consumption. Upon hearing both the parties, we are finding that the order of such a nature should not have been passed ex-parte. The Power Supply Company should have been heard before passing any such order. Now, when the current bills in respect of two meters were to the extent of Rs.1,31,510/- and Rs.25,593/- asking the complainant just to pay 1/3 amount of both the bills and directing O.P./Power Sup...