Mumbai Court March 2009 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.
Gunmala Ghendmal Jhaveri Vs. Sushila Kanakmal Gandhi and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-25-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)BomLR1398
Roshan Dalvi, J.1. This Chamber Summons has taken exception to the report of the Commissioner, High Court, Bombay dated 24.10.2008 made upon the preliminary decree being passed in the suit.2. The suit is for partition. The Plaintiff claims 1/3 rd share in the suit property (the suit was filed by the original Plaintiff. The present plaintiffs are her heirs brought on record pending the suit. They shall be referred to as the Plaintiff). The suit property is a tenanted building which has seven residential flats, one show room, one shop and one hoarding. The Plaintiff inter alia alleged in paragraph (13) of the plaint that the Defendants in collusion and without knowledge and consent of the Plaintiffs have transferred the tenancy of the ground floor premises (which consists of show room and the shop). The Plaintiffs alleged in paragraph (14) of the plaint that the Defendants unauthorisedly and wrongfully created tenancy in respect of the third party for the ground floor premises. The Plain...
Cartini India Ltd. Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-25-2009
Reported in: (2009)224CTR(Bom)82; [2009]314ITR275(Bom); 2009(4)MhLj102; [2009]179TAXMAN157(Bom)
J.P. Devadhar, J.1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing.2. Whether the notice issued by the Assessing Officer under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) on 30-3-2007 to reopen the assessment for assessment year 2002-03 is valid and whether the Assessing Officer by his order dated 15-9-2008 is justified in rejecting the objections raised by the petitioner regarding the reopening of the assessment are the two questions raised in this petition.3. The petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing refrigerators, air conditioners and washing machines.4. The petitioner had filed its return of income in respect of assessment year 2002-03 on 31-10-2002, declaring loss of Rs. 72,57,26,992.5. In the said return of income, the petitioner had claimed deduction of the entire 'project launch expenses' incurred during the previous year as revenue expenditure even though in its books of a...
Venkateshwara Alloys (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Goa and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-25-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Bom106
U.D. Salvi, J.1. Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been invoked by the petitioner, Venkateshwara Alloys (P) Limited, a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, and having its registered office at Bright Complex, Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad, for seeking a writ directing the respondents to forthwith restore the electric power supply to the petitioner's plant situated at Kundaim Industrial Estate, Kundaim Goa, which has been disconnected as back as on 14-12-1998, upon the payment of such amount by way of arrears of electricity charges as determined to be legally due and further for a declaration that the provisions of Clauses 29(b) and 31(c)(ii) of Notification dated 6-11-1989 published In the Official Gazette dated 18-1-1990 are ultra vires the powers of the State Government under the Electricity Act, 1910 in particular Section 24 thereof.2. According to the petitioner-company, a plant for manufacturing ferro/silicon, manganese and chrome alloys was set up following an A...
Cit Vs. Kotak Mahindra Finance Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-25-2009
Reported in: (2009)227CTR(Bom)596
F.I. Rebello, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the revenue wherein they have raised the following question:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble Tribunal is right in allowing the assesses claim of depreciation ?2. A few facts may be set out. The assessee is in the business of leasing. It purchased breakers from M/s Asia Brown Broevery Ltd. and leased out the same to M/s Tata Electric Company Ltd. The assessee claimed depreciation amounting to Rs. 25,25,889. Tata Electric Company Ltd. had installed the said breakers in July, 1990 (sic-July, 1992). In other words, not in the financial year 1991-92. The assessing officer on this basis disallowed the depreciation by rejecting the contention of the assessee that the breakers were given on lease before the end of previous year and therefore, the same should be considered as 'used' for the purpose of business.3. The assessing officer disallowed the claim for depreciation on the ground that the as...
Bhalchandra Ganesh Naik and Smt. Bharati Bhalchandra Naik Vs. Sona Hot ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-24-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)BomCR780; 2009(111)BomLR1659
C.L. Pangarkar, J.1. This is an appeal filed against the order passed by the Civil Judge Senior Division, Panaji.2. The facts giving rise to the appeal are as follows:The plaintiffs have instituted a Special Civil Suit No. 208/91 against the respondents/defendants. Respondents/ defendants appeared in the Court and filed their written statement. Issues were framed and the suit came to be fixed for recording evidence of the parties. Accordingly, part of the evidence of the plaintiffs' witness No. 1 is recorded by the Court. Subsequently, the suit came to be adjourned on many occasions. Ultimately, on 2.1.2007, the same suit came up for recording evidence before the Court. On that date, the plaintiffs remained absent. Counsel for the plaintiffs informed the Court that he has no instructions in the matter and the Court may proceed in accordance with law. This was done since the other side had objected to the matter being adjourned. On 2.1.2007, therefore, the Court in the Roznama recorded ...
Raghunath Shankar Kelkar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through Cabinet Secr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-24-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)BomCR360; 2009(111)BomLR1569; [2009]92SCL28(Bom)
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. A working group was constituted by the Reserve Bank of India the 'Internal Working Group on the Instruments of Sterilization' to examine a range of issues arising out of increasing foreign currency assets of the bank and depleting stock of Government securities in its portfolio, which limit the capacity of the Bank to sterilize the monetary impart of sustained forex capital inflows. The report of the Working Group was submitted on 2nd December, 2003. The Working Group noted that a developing economy is liable to attract high forex inflows whether through capital investments or current account transactions or otherwise by the net surpluses of the two. Such inflows have implications for domestic monetary policy and exchange rate management. In a fully floating exchange rate regime, the exchange rate would adjust itself in accordance with demand and supply conditions in the forex market, obviating the need for intervention by the central bank. However, when huge for...
Pimpri Chinchwad New Town Development Authority Vs. the State of Mahar ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-24-2009
Reported in: 2009(111)BomLR1939
Bilal Nazki, J.1. The State Government decided to set up a new town in terms of Chapter VI of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act and for that purpose a Notification was issued in the year 1972 under Section 113 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act (for short 'MRTP Act'). The State Government designated a total area of about 4323 Hectares land for the site of proposed new town. The said Notification created the petitioner as an Authority under Section 113 Sub section 2 of the MRTP Act. Thereafter, proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act were initiated for the purpose of acquisition of land. The area of about 2400 Hectares of land were sought to be acquired through this Notification. This land falls in 10 villages in and around Pimpri Chinchwad and Nigadi. The petitioner authority gave a draft development plan under the provisions of the MRTP Act to the Government of Maharashtra for sanction in the year 1974. The Plan was finally sanctioned on 8th September, 1977. The...
In Re: Niulab Equipment Co. (P.) Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-24-2009
Reported in: [2009]152CompCas375(Bom); [2009]91SCL387(Bom)
S.J. Vazifdar, J.1. The petitioners seek the sanction of this Court to a scheme of amalgamation. The petitioner in Company Petition No. 382 of 2008, Niulab Equipment Company Pvt. Ltd., is the transferor-company and the petitioner in Company Petition No. 383 of 2008, Ashok Industries Ltd., is the transferee-company.2. The provisions of the scheme as such have not been challenged or even questioned. It is not necessary, therefore, to deal with it in any detail. Suffice it to state, that under the scheme, the entire undertaking of the transferor-company is to stand transferred to and vested in the transferee-company as a going concern, subject to the same being sanctioned by this Court. Under the scheme, two equity shares of Rs. 10 each credited as fully paid up capital of the transferee-company are to be issued and allotted to all the equity shareholders of the transferor-company for every one equity share of the face value of Re. 1 each, held by them of the transferor-company.3. The pet...
Smt. Savitri Chandrakesh Pal Vs. State of Maharashtra,
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-24-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)MhLj406
V.C. Daga, J.1. Rule, returnable forthwith.2. Mr. Gangal, special counsel appearing along with learned A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Mr. Warunjikar with Mr. Pol for respondent No. 4 waived service.3. Heard finally by consent of parties.4. Perused petition, affidavits and counter affidavits.5. This petition is directed against the order dated 24th November, 2006 passed by the Hon'ble Minister for Food and Civil Supply and Consumer Protection, Mantralaya, Mumbai, the respondent No. 3 whereby and whereunder the revision petition filed by the petitioner challenging the order of the Controller of Rationing, the respondent No. 2 dated 17th December, 2004 was dismissed.Factural Matrix:6. The factual matrix reveal that the Controller of Rationing, Churchgate, Mumbai, the respondent No. 2 herein had issued an advertisement in the local newspapers dated 8th November, 2002 notifying intention to make allotment of rationing shop under Item No. 207/02 for the area Pimpri Pada, Malad (East) ...
Venkatesh Pradyumnacharya Varakhedakar (Since Deceased by His Heirs an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-23-2009
Reported in: 2009(6)BomCR472; 2009(4)MhLj476
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. This Public Interest Litigation has been brought by Mr Bheemacharya Vyankatesh Varakhedakar, legal heir of late Mr Venkatesh Pradyumnacharya Varakhedakar, the Petitioner, with the prayer the records and proceedings of the cases referred in the Petition be called for and Review Petition Stamp No. 28623 of 2004 in Second Appeal No. 521 of 1983 be withdrawn from the Court of Mr. Justice A.S. Oka and be placed for decision in accordance with law before any other Bench.2. The Petitioner had filed a Suit being Regular Civil Suit No. 562 of 1980 with a prayer that he is member of Sanatan Vaidic Hindu religion, Vaishnhav Bhagavat society and has a right to perform the puja and also to demand dakshina by performing the religious ceremonies in the Vitthal Rukminhee temple. He also claims that he possessess the right of management in view of Articles 25, 26 and 29 of the Constitution of India and according to him his fundamental rights were being infringed. The Suit was ba...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »