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.
Indian National Shipowners' Association, a Company having Its register ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-23-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)BomCR369; 2009(111)BomLR1529; (2009)224CTR(Bom)197; [2009]17STJ255; 2009[14]STR289; [2009]19STT408; (2009)22VST293(Bom)
Ranjana Desai, J.1. The 1st petitioner is the Indian National Ship Owners' Association which is registered as a nonprofit making company under Section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956. Members of the 1st petitioner are owners of Indian Flag Vessels. The Shipping Corporation of India (SCI) is one of its members. The 2nd petitioner is also a member of the 1st petitioner. He is a shareholder of a Member Company of the 1st petitioner.2. The 1st respondent is the nodal Ministry in-charge of all matters and policies relating to Revenue. Respondent 2 is an apex body functioning under the control of respondent 1 that regulates all policy decisions relating to Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax matters. One of the functions of the 2nd respondent is to issue clarifications under Section 378 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994. Respondent 3 is the Commissioner of Service Tax and Respondent 4 is the Additional Commissioner (Technical) Service Tax, Mumbai...
Shri Eknath P. Kamble Vs. Smt. Janqui Nilu Kamble and Shri Marcel D'Cu ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-21-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)BomCR395
C.L. Pangarkar, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the opposite party No. 1 against the award passed by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal, are as follows:The respondent No. 1's son was working as a workman with opposite party i.e. the present appellant. The appellant used to take contract of construction of well and he had, therefore, engaged the deceased Santosh as a mason and on the date of the incident i.e. 08.04.1987, said Santosh was working as a mason in the well, which was to be constructed for opposite party No. 2 i.e. the respondent No. 2. At the time of the death, said workman Santosh was 22 years' old and was being paid wages of Rs. 40/- per day. On 08.04.1987, while the work of construction of well was going on, the part of the well suddenly collapsed and Santosh was buried under the debris. He died of suffocation. His mother/ the respondent No. 1 filed an application. She contended that the appellant had engaged her son San...
Shri Gabriel Fernandes Vs. Deputy Director of Panchayat,
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-21-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)BomCR768; 2009(111)BomLR1813
C.L. Pangarkar, J.1. This Writ Petition is filed by the original opponent No. 1 before Dy. Director of Panchayats of North Goa, being aggrieved by the decision rendered by the Director of Panchayats in Panchayat Appeal No. 101/2000.2. The facts giving rise to the appeal are as follows:One Mrs. Helena Menezes is a holder of Power of Attorney of one Mr. Jose Rozetinha Ismail Henriques dos Remedios. Jose Rozetinha Ismail Henriques dos Remedios is the owner of the property surveyed under No. 178/12 of village Calangute. There is a house bearing No. E/5/91 standing in the same property. One Gabriel Fernandes i.e the present Petitioner and his wife and his cousin Joao Fernandes are occupying the said house. The petitioner has filed an application before the Mamlatdar claiming himself to be a mundkar of the said property. The said application is pending before the Mamlatdar. It is the contention of the owner of the suit property that during the pendency of the said proceedings before the Maml...
Mrs. Anjum Fatima Aslam Vs. Mrs. Ayesha Anis Shaikh and Municipal Corp ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-21-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)MhLj729
Anoop V. Mohta, J.1. Heard finally, by consent.2. The Petitioner has challenged two separate impugned orders dated 22nd January 2009 at Exhibit 45 and 48 in Election Petition No. 51 of 2007 pending for final hearing in a Small Causes Court at Bombay, whereby the application for an amendment and application for recalling the witnesses and to led evidence were rejected.3. The Petitioner was declared as elected candidate from Ward No. 3 in the Election of Bombay Municipal Corporation i.e. B.M.C. held on 1st February 2007. The said Ward was a Reserved Ward for Other Backward Class woman candidates. Respondent No. 1 had challenged the election of the Petitioner in Election Petition No. 51 of 2007 on the ground that the Petitioner is not O.B.C. candidate and therefore, was not qualified even to contest the election as the Petitioner filed false and improper nomination form. These facts are not in dispute.4. Respondent No. 1 has secured second highest number of votes. Therefore, claiming to b...
Maharashtra Seva Sangh (Through Its Secretary) and the Principal, Shre ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-21-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)MhLj198
D.B. Bhosale, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the judgment and order dated 8.9.1999 in appeal No. 70 of 1997 rendered by the Presiding Officer, Additional School Tribunal, Pune Region, Solapur. The appeal, filed by respondent No. 1 under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private School (Conditions of Service) Regulation, Act (for short 'MEPS Act'), challenging his termination has been allowed by the Tribunal. The operative portion of the impugned judgment reads thus:Appeal is allowed as under.The orders of reducing the appellant from full time teacher to part time teacher and from part time teacher to teacher on Clock Hour Basis issued by the Deputy Director of Education and Respondent No. 1 are hereby declared illegal and are quashed and set aside.Appellant is restored to full time teacher in Higher Secondary School by name Shree Nutan Prashala Jr. College, Solapur, since 1.4.1994. He is entitled to get salarie...
Shri Sawale Motiram Shridhar Vs. Maharashtra Seva Sangh and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-21-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)MhLj233
D.B. Bhosale, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the judgment and order dated 8.10.1999 rendered by the School Tribunal in Appeal No. 9 of 2006, by which the appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private School (for short 'MEPS Act'), has been dismissed. The petitioner, in the appeal, had challenged his termination order, which was passed on the ground that he was not holding the prescribed qualification. The school tribunal after having considered overall facts and circumstances of the case and the relevant provisions of MEPS Act and the Rules framed thereunder dismissed the appeal. In paragraphs 17 and 19 the school tribunal observed thus:17. .... In the present matter, the appellant was untrained and the Deputy Director of Education has given relaxation to his qualification and accorded approval to his appointment on year to year basis only. Therefore, the appellant cannot acquir...
Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay Vs. Uco Bank and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-21-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)BomCR478
Bobde S.A., J.1. Other side is served.2. This appeal is filed by the Board of Trustees of The Port of Bombay, against the order dated 10th March, 2005 passed by a Single Judge dismissing the appellant's suit for non-compliance of discovery of inspection of documents.3. On the defendant No. 5's Notice of Motion, the learned Single Judge of this Court, passed an order recording the appellant's no objection to grant of inspection within certain time. Thereafter, inspection was given, except two documents (a) Bill of Lading; and (b) Invoice and Packing List of the consignee. Since these two documents were mentioned in the respondents/defendants' Notice of Motion for inspection, they were included in the order for inspection. The said defendant No. 5 took out a Notice of Motion for dismissal of the appellant's suit under Order XI, Rule 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The learned Single Judge who heard the motion noticed the plaintiff/appellant's contention that inspection of the document...
In Re: Ajmera Realty and Infra India Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-21-2009
Reported in: [2009]151CompCas442(Bom)
S.J. Vazifdar, J.1. The petitioners seek an order sanctioning a scheme of arrangement entered into between them. The scheme involves the demerger of the steel division of the petitioner in Company Petition No. 63 of 2009, the transferor company and the merger thereof into the resulting company, i.e., the petitioner in Company Petition No. 64 of 2009.2. The procedure has been complied with. The Regional Director has filed an affidavit stating that subject to the observations in paragraph 6 thereof, the scheme does not appear to be prejudicial to the interest of the shareholders and the public.3. In paragraph 6 of the affidavit, the Regional Director has stated that neither the petitions nor the scheme provide details of the assets and liabilities of the steel division of the demerged company that are to be transferred to and vested in the resulting company.4. As pointed out by Mr. Mehta, the petitioners' scheme itself in Clause 1.10 defines the steel division as under:1.10 'steel divisi...
Associated Cement Companies Limited Vs. Associated Cement Staff Union
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-21-2009
Reported in: (2009)IVLLJ756Bom
ORDERD.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. Admit. The Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents waives service. With the consent of the Learned Counsel and upon their request, the appeal is taken up for hearing and final disposal.On January 2, 2009 the appellant issued orders to ten employees engaged in the Share Department effecting transfer from Mumbai to diverse places, all over India. The administrative exigencies which warranted the orders of transfer have been explained by the employer thus;2. Until 1996-97 transfers of shares were carried out in the physical form. Thereafter in accordance with the requirement introduced by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) shares of publicly held companies were dematerialised and electronic transfer became mandatory. The letters of transfer addressed to the ten employees advert to the fact that the volume of physical transfers declined by 99% and, as on December 31, 2008 more than 93.8% of the shares of the company have been dematerialised....
Prasad Agents Private Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-20-2009
Reported in: 2009(111)BomLR1631; (2009)226CTR(Bom)13; [2009]180TAXMAN178(Bom)
F.I. Rebello, J.1. The Appellant a non-banking financial company has approached this Court against the order dated 13th August, 2008 passed by the I.T.A.T. for the assessment year 2001-2002. The A.O. by his order had directed that loss of Rs. 6,00,877/- in share trading, was a speculation loss by virtue of Explanation to Section 73 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In respect of the said disallowance and on some other aspects, the assessee preferred an Appeal before C.I.T. (A). C.I.T. (A) by its order was pleased to observe that the business of the appellant consists of trading and investment in shares, debentures, bonds, mutual funds and other securities pursuant to its Memorandum of Association. The Tribunal considering the arguments was pleased to place reliance on the order of the Delhi Bench in Aman Portofolio Pvt. Ltd., 92 ITD 324 (Delhi) as also the clarification issued by C.B.T.D.'s Circular No. 204 dated 24th July, 1976 and held that the A.O. was not justified to treat the loss in ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »