Mumbai Court June 2009 Judgments

Ramchandra Sitaramji Heda and Sona Chemicals, Proprietary Through Prop ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(4)BomCR614

S.A. Bobde, J.1. The petitioners carry on business of micro-fertilizers in the name and style of Sona Chemicals at MIDC, Amravati. They have been regularly purchasing Borax from outside Amravati and importing it within the limits of the Amravati Municipal Corporation by road.2. By this petition, the petitioners have challenged the action of the Amravati Municipal Corporation in levying octroi on Borax under Item 40(b) of the Maharashtra Municipalities (Octroi) Rules, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') @ 4% of the value of the goods. Earlier, the Municipal Corporation was charging octroi on the basis that the goods in question, i.e. Borax was a 'chemical manure' under Item 85 of the Rules @ Re.1/- per tonne. Aggrieved by the action of the Municipal Corporation in classifying Borax as a 'chemical' and charging @ 4% ad valorem instead of classifying it as a 'chemical manure' and charging octroi @ Re.1/- per tonne, the petitioners have approached this Court.3. In Shedule I, the ...

Urvath Vargese Paul Vs. Shah Khimji Passoo, Since Deceased by His Heir ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(5)BomCR137

R.Y. Ganoo, J.1. One Mr. Shah Khimji Passoo instituted a suit in the City Civil Court at Bombay being Short Cause Suit No. 4331 of 1973 against the present appellant and by the said suit said Shah Khimji i.e. the original plaintiff wanted an Order of Injunction from the Court so as to restrain the present appellant from entering into or remaining in the space marked as 'A' in the plaint at Exhibit A, save and except for using it to approach to the lavatory and to the bathroom. Said Shah also wanted an Order of injunction restraining the present appellant from opening the door of Room No. 2 leading to the said space marked as Exhibit A. According to said Shah, said space was to be used by the present appellant for the limited purpose of approaching to the WC and bathroom and not for using it for any other purpose such as dumping the articles of the present appellant. According to said Shah the appellant started using the said space which really was a Veranda (For short the suit premises...

Shashikant S/O Girdhardas Bagdi, Vs. Ratanlal S/O Kanhaiyalal Rathi

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(4)BomCR589

R.C. Chavan, J.1. This revision is directed against dismissal by the learned District Judge of applicant tenant's appeal against order passed by the learned Judge Court of Small Causes rejecting his application Exh. 63 under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure for rejection of plaint.2. Facts relevant for deciding this revision are mostly not disputed. The respondent landlord applied to the Rent Controller for permission to issue quit notice to the applicant tenant under the C.P. and Berar Rent Control Order. Such permission was granted on 10.01.1997. On 16.07.1999, the landlord filed Regular Civil Suit No. 239 of 1999 for recovery of arrears of rent from 01.09.1996 to 31.07.1999. In the said suit on 18.01.2001 tenant's application for depositing rent was allowed. On 31.03.2000 the Maharashtra Rent Control Act came into force repealing C.P. & Berar Rent Control Act and Order. On 08.01.2001 the landlord issued quit notice to the applicant terminating his tenancy and filed t...

General Mazdoor Sabha Vs. Exon Laboratories Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2010)ILLJ202Bom

V.M. Kanade, J.1. The petitioner is a Trade Union, representing four workers. Respondent Company is engaged in manufacturing intermediate for drugs and Pharmaceuticals. The petitioner is challenging Part-I Award dated July 10, 2006 and Part-II Award dated April 16, 2008 passed by the Hon'ble Labour Court at Mahad in Reference(IDA) 318/2000.2. The only point urged by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner is that the Labour Court had not assigned any reasons for recording findings given in Part-I Award on both the issues viz. on the question, whether the inquiry held against the workmen was legal, fair and proper and also on the question, whether findings of the Inquiry Officer are perverse. He invited my attention to the impugned order and the findings on both these issues. He submitted that it was open for the workmen to challenge both the Awards simultaneously. In support of the said submission-he relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Cooper Eng...

Shri Yashwant Aatmaram Limaye Dombivali(E) Vs. Shri Mahesh Prabhkar Li ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Mr. S.R. Khanzode, Honble Presiding Judicial Member: This appeal is directed against the order/award dated 29/04/2008 passed in consumer complaint 192/2007 Shri Yashwant Aatmaram Limaye V/s. Shri Mahesh Prabhkar Limaye by District Forum, Pune (Forum below in short). Consumer complaint on alleged deficiency in service stood dismissed and feeling aggrieved thereby, original complaint preferred this appeal. There is delay of about 6 months in filing the appeal and hence the application for condonation of delay is also filed. It is the case of the appellant that development agreement dated 07/11/1997 between he himself, his brother and sisters on one part and M/s. Vimal Enterprises, a proprietary concern through proprietor- Shri Mahesh Prabhakar Limaye on other part. Shri Mahesh Prabhakar Limaye is a builder and developer. The said agreement had taken place in respect of ancestral property of the family situated at Pune. It is a grievance made by the complainant, as could be seen from ...

Life Insurance Corporation of India, Life Insurance Corporation of Ind ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Mr. S.R. Khanzode, Honble Presiding Judicial Member: This appeal arises out of order/award dated 31/01/2009 passed in consumer complaint no.277/2008 Narmada Haridas Patel, Kolhapur V/s. Divisional Office, LIC passed by District Forum, Kolhapur (Forum below in short). On the death of Shri Haridas Patel which occurred on 17/10/2007 his wife/ Smt.Narmada and son Bharat (complainant nos. 1 and 2) made an insurance claim under Bima Gold Policy taken out by the deceased from the appellant/org.opp.party as per policy no. 947283618 dated 07/06/2007 for sum of Rs.1lakh. Insurance company repudiated the said claim stating that at the time filling the proposal form, the deceased/Haridas did not disclose the details of insurance policies taken by him and feeling aggrieved thereby, the complainant filed this consumer complaint which came to be decreed in favour of the complainant. We head Adv.Ms.Sheetal Patil @Adv.Shri A.S.Vidyarthi for appellant. Perused the record. Admittedly, the complete i...

Mrs. Shantiben Popatlal Shah and Another Vs. Amar Deep Co-operative Ho ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Mr. P.N. Kashalkar,Honble Presiding Judicial Member 1) This is an appeal filed by Org.O.P.No.2 and 3 against the judgment and award passed by Mumbai Suburban District Consumer Forum in Consumer Complaint No.174/2005 decided on 13/10/2006 whereby, the Forum below allowed the complaint against O.P.No.1 to 3 and directed them to execute conveyance in favour of the complainant society within one month from the receipt of order failing which it directed O.P.No.1 to 3 to pay penalty of Rs.1,000/- per month. It also restrained O.P.NO.1 to 3 from creating any third party interest in the common open space and common utility space of the construction. 2) Briefly facts to the extent material may be stated as under: 3) Complainant Amardeep Co-operative Housing Society filed consumer complaint against M/s.Ambika Constructioin Company, Vakola, Santacruz(East)Mumbai. It also impleaded Mr.Kamlesh Popatlal Shah and Mrs.Shantiben Popatlal Shah and Mr.Prakash P.Gala as O.P.No.2 to 4, r/o Flat No.D/...

Mr. Arun K. Engineer, Chira Bazaar, Mumbai Vs. Dr. Milind Karmarkar, M ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Smt. S.P. Lale, Honble Member This appeal is filed by appellant/org. complainant against the dismissal order dated 31/08/2007 passed by Central Mumbai District Consumer Forum in consumer complaint No.1031/2003. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are as under:- According to the complainant, O.P. gave medical treatment of dental implants and surgery on his teeth. O.P. took Rs.70,000/- as advance for purchase of new implants. It is alleged by the complainant that O.P. used second hand implants resulting in failure of surgery. It is also alleged by the complainant that O.P. frequently changed the implants when they failed to integrate in his jaw bones. O.P. used method which was questionable to the ethics of implant practice. Due to negligence of O.P., damage is caused to the complainants nerves on right side of his lower jaw. O.P. refused to remove the pain. As pain became unbearable, O.P. removed two implants of right side by another doctor. The complainant had doubt that O....

The New India Assurance Co.Ltd., Through their Regional Office No.1 Ne ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Honble Presiding Judicial Member 1. This appeal arises out of order/award dated 29/12/2007 passed in consumer complaint no.477/2006 Mr.Shashikant Dube-Proprietor of Prerna Collections V/s. Divisional Manager, The New India Assurance Co.Ltd. passed by South Mumbai District Consumer Forum (Forum below in short). 2. Respondent/org.complainant had taken Shopkeepers Insurance policy, which was issued by the appellant/org.O.P. Said Insurance Co. offered cover of Rs.4 lakhs covering inter-alia stock in trade as well as furniture and fixtures. On 26/7/2005 due to heavy rainfall the shop was flooded causing damage to the stock of readymade garments as well as furniture and fixture. On 29/7/2005, Insurance Co. was informed about loss of Rs.2,87,745/- and insurance claim was lodged. Insurance Co. appointed surveyor and on the basis of survey report repudiated the claim. Feeling aggrieved thereby consumer complaint was filed. Forum below partly allowed the complaint and aw...

Mr. Dilip Vasantrao Kadam, Dist- Raigad Vs. Shri Anil Baburao Achrekar ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Mr. S.R. Khanzode, Honble Presiding Judicial Member: This appeal arises out of order/award dated 05/11/2007 passed in consumer complaint no.71/2007Shri Dilip Vasantrao Kadam v/s. Shri Anil Baburao Achrekar by District Forum, Raigad (Forum below in short). It is the case of the appeallnt/org.complainant/Dilip that he agreed to purchase one residential unit and one shop from a newly constructed building-Swami Sadan, developed and built by respondent/org.opp.party/Anil Acharekar as per agreement dated 05/04/2004 for consideration of Rs.5,29,000/- and Rs.2,68,000 total amounted to Rs.7,12,000/-. Out of same the complainant claimed to have paid Rs.62,500/-. To pay balance of the purchase price, the complainant had taken loan of Rs.4,90,000/- from General Insurance Housing Finance. Since he had not received the possession of the property, he suffered losses on two counts viz. required to pay interest on loan of Rs.41,730/- to the Finance Company and secondly, had to incur expenditure of ...