Mumbai Court March 2009 Judgments

St. Philomena Convent High School Through Its Principal Sister Fatima ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(111)BomLR1593; 2009(4)MhLj255

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. St. Philomena Convent High School has been in existence for well over sixty years. The campus of the school at Nashik houses four additional institutions where students are admitted from Kindergarten to the Tenth Standard. Nearly 6,000 students study in these institutions. Across the road from the campus is a plot of land bearing Survey No. 130A/3 belonging to the Eighth Respondent. The school is situated on the Nashik Road. The bone of contention in these proceedings is the commencement of the business of a retail petroleum outlet by Indian Oil Corporation - the Sixth Respondent - on the land in question.2. The relief that has been sought in these proceedings is an appropriate declaration and a consequential writ revoking the permission granted for the allotment and construction of the retail petroleum outlet. The basis and foundation of the Petition is that the permissions that were granted by the Nashik Municipal Corporation were in violation of Development Co...

Brahma-siddheshwar Co-operative, Housing Society Ltd. and 5 ors. Vs. S ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(4)MhLj62

1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.1A. Rule returnable forthwith with consent of parties.2. The petitioners have approached to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging a decision of the State Government dated 13.7.2007, rejecting a proposal submitted by respondent Nos. 2 and 3 under Section 37 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, thereby, proposing a modification in the final Development Plan, more specifically of a piece of land bearing No. 424-A, which has been shown in the final Development Plan as a lake.3. The petitioners are the various societies, members of which have encroached upon the land marked as 'lake' or 'tank' bearing No. 424-A, located within the Corporation area of Thane. It appears that the said lake is know as 'Siddheshwar Talao or tank'. The petitioners have encroached upon the land of the said lake and it appears that nearabout half of the portion has been encroached upon. The petitioners state that they are p...

Bindiya A. Chawla and ors. Vs. Ajay Lajpatrai Chawla and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(5)BomCR486

Dalvi Roshan, J.1. Plaintiff No. 1 is the mother of plaintiffs No. 2 and 3 who are her minor children. The suit is filed by plaintiff No. 1 for herself as well as on behalf of plaintiffs No. 2 and 3. Defendant No. 1 is the husband of plaintiff No. 1 and father of plaintiffs No. 2 and 3. Defendant No. 2 is the father-in-law of plaintiff No. 1 and the grand father of plaintiffs No. 2 and 3. Defendant No. 3 is the brother-in-law of plaintiff No. 1 and the Uncle of plaintiffs No. 2 and 3. Defendant No. 4 is the mother-in-law of plaintiff No. 1 and Grandmother of plaintiffs No. 2 and 3.2. Plaintiff No. 1 and defendant No. 1 got married in November, 1991 in Mumbai. They lived in the USA from 1991 onwards. The suit flat stood in their names. Plaintiff No. 1 also claims to have a key to the suit flat as shall be seen presently.3. Since October, 2006 there have been proceedings for divorce between the parties. Under certain restraint orders passed by the Superior Court of California in the USA....

Vijaykumar Tukaram Kasale Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(6)BomCR461

Hardas P.V., 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. Such of the facts as are necessary for the decision of this writ petition, may briefly be stated thus:On 7.1.1991 the petitioner came to be appointed as a junior lecturer in the Savitribai Phule High School and Junior College at Nalgir, Dist-Latur. It appears that approval came to be granted to the petitioner on year to year basis but the services of the petitioner came to be terminated on 12.6.1999 as the respondent refused to grant approval to the appointment of the petitioner for the reasons which are not germane at this moment. Petitioner being aggrieved by this termination filed an appeal before the School Tribunal at Aurangabad. The School Tribunal by its judgment and order dated 14.7.2003 allowed the appeal and directed reinstatement of the petitioner with full backwages. The petitioner consequently came to be...

Rajesh Niranjan Singhania (Dr.) Vs. Surajmal Kamidanji Dhadiwal Since ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(6)BomCR463

Bhatia J.H., J.1. Parties in both these writ petitions are common and some questions of facts are also common. Therefore, these petitions may be disposed of by the common judgment.2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With consent of the learned Counsel for both the parties, the petitions are taken up for final hearing, immediately.3. Admitted, facts are that the present petitioner is the tenant and deceased Surajmal was the landlord. Respondents in both the petitions are legal heirs of said Surajmal. The petitioner was inducted as a tenant in the suit premises admeasuring about 1500 sq. ft. on 1/4/1996 and he started his Nursing Home in name and style as 'Shubham Nursing Home'. As per the terms of the agreement, the petitioner was to pay amount of Rs. 3000/- towards rent for use and occupation of the premises, Rs. 2500/- towards the facility of Well and uninterrupted water supply to the Nursing Home and Rs. 2500/-towards service charges for fittings and fixtures. The petitioner mad...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Cello Writing Instruments and Container ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2009]319ITR63(Bom)

1. The Revenue is in appeal on the following question:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the hon'ble Tribunal was justified in law in holding that a debatable issue which cannot be a subject-matter of rectification in proceedings under Section 154 of the Act, without appreciating the fact that the assessee has not deducted depreciation from the eligible profit before claiming deduction under Section 80-IB 2. For the assessment year 2000-01 the Assessing Officer exercised jurisdiction under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The issue pertained to claim of depreciation by an assessee. Aggrieved the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The Commissioner of Income-tax considering the arguments was pleased to hold that the provisions of Section 154 were only applicable in case of error apparent on the face of the record and, in the instant case, there was no such mistake apparent on the record warranting exercise of juris...

Pepsico India Holdings Private Limited, Mumbai and Another Vs. Shri Mu ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Oral Order: Per Mr. P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member 1) This is an appeal by filed by O.P.No.1 and 2 Pepsico India Holding Private Limited against the judgment and award passed by the Additional Thane District Forum, at Konkan Bhavan, Navi Mumbai in Consumer Complaint No.33/2007 decided on 29/12/2007. By the said judgment and award, the Forum below allowed the complaint partly and directed O.P.No.1 and 2 to jointly and severally pay Rs.8,000/- as compensation and Rs.2,000/- as cost within sixty days from the date of order. 2) Facts to the extent material may be state as under: 3) One Madhukar Ramdas Patil, r/o Vashi, Navi Mumbai filed consumer complaint against Pepsico India Holding Private Limited and against Shri Sai Darshan Hotel of Vashi, Navi Mumbai alleging supply of goods which were hazardous to health. He pleaded that he purchased two bottles of cold drinks namely Mountain Dew on 14/2/2007 from Sai Darshan Hotel, Vashi, Navi Mumbai. Out of which he consumed o...

Dr. Sanjay Anandrao Powar, Tal- Gadhinglaj, Dist- Kolhapur Vs. Mr. Pra ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Oral Order:- Per Justice Mr. B.B. Vagyani, Honble President: We heard Adv.Shri Anand Patwardhan for appellant and Adv.Shri Santosh Jagtap for the respondent. The issue involved in the consumer complaint is of medical negligence. The appellant was asked to file written statement on payment of cost of Rs.5,000/-. The said order was received by the appellant. However, he could not file written statement within time limit prescribed by the State Commission. Therefore, District Forum did not consider his written statement. District Forum therefore, decided the matter ex-parte without considering the written statement. The issue of medical negligence is important issue. The reputation of the appellant is at stake. The matter is required to be decided on merits. We therefore, pass the following order:- Order: 1. Appeal is allowed. 2. Impugned order under challenge is quashed and set aside. 3. District Forum shall consider written statement filed by the appellant and decide the matter on mer...

Dr. Smt. Rajashree (Asha) V. Karkhanis, Thane Vs. Smt. AlesIn Fernande ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Justice Mr. B.B. Vagyani, Honble President 1. Heard Mrs. Trupti Gaikar-Advocate for the appellant, appellant in person and Mr. A.K. Kadam-Advocate for the respondent at length. Also considered their written submissions. Perused the case law relied by the counsels for the parties. 2. Appellant is a Gynecologist and Obstetrician. Respondent had pain in her abdomen. She therefore visited appellant on 1/3/1994. She was referred to Dr.Vinay Desai for Sonography. Sonography was done. Respondent was admitted in the hospital of appellant on 3/3/1994. Appellant noticed a mass in the abdomen of the respondent. Operation was therefore carried out on 4/3/1994. The tumor in the abdomen was ruptured. Major portion of lining was removed. Material removed from the abdomen was sent to Dr.Bhave for examination. Respondent was discharged from the hospital after one week. Respondent had been to the hospital of appellant on 23/8/1994. Respondent had similar kind of complaint. The appellant suspected ...

National Aviation Company of India Limited, Mumbai Vs. Mr. Rajas R. Do ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Oral Order: Per Mr. P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member 1) Being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by District Consumer Forum, South Mumbai in Consumer Complaint No.213/2004, whereby, while allowing the complaint, the Forum below directed Air India to pay lump sum Rs.40,000/- as compensation to the complainant within two months from the date of receipt of order or to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 6/9/2004 till realization and also directed to pay Rs.5,000/- as cost to the complainant, the Org.O.P./Air India has filed this appeal taking strong exception to the order passed by the Forum. 2) Facts to the extent material may be stated as under: 3) The complainant Mr.Rajas R.Doshi and his wife Mrs.Jyoti had filed the consumer complaint against Air India which is now known as National Aviation Company of India Limited. According to the complainants, Complainant No.1 is a Civil Engineer and Director of few companies. He is required to travel abroad freq...