Mumbai Court July 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.
Modi Fibres Limited a Company Incorporated Under the Companies Act, 19 ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-03-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)BomCR547; 2009(111)BomLR3154; [2009]151CompCas181(Bom); [2009]94SCL102(Bom)
A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. This Appeal under Section 10F of the Indian Companies Act, 1956 takes exception to the Judgment and order passed by the Member of the Company Law Board (Principal Bench, New Delhi) (hereinafter referred to as CLB) dated 16/4/2009 in Company Application No. 255/2008 in Company Petition No. 48/2008. For the nature of order that I am inclined to pass, it is not necessary to reproduce all the facts in detail. Similarly, it may not be necessary to delve upon all the issues on merits. The contesting Respondent No. 1 waives notice. In view of the short question, appeal is finally disposed off. 2. I would straightway advert to the operative order passed by the CLB which is subject matter of challenge in this Appeal. The same reads thus: Considering the facts and circumstances of this case this composite petition is admitted in part under Section 111A of the Act, a prima facie case having been made out this composite petition is held to be maintainable under Section 111A(4...
Shobha W/O Ashokrao Deshmukh Vs. Jagannath S/O Parshuram Shinde and or ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-03-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)BomCR575; 2009(111)BomLR3146
Shrihari P. Davare, J.1. This Civil Revision Application arises out of the order passed below Exh. 1 in M.A. No. 82/2003, by learned District Judge, Latur on 31.3.2004 and the petitioner herein prayed that the said impugned order be quashed and set aside.2. The factual matrix in brief are that, the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 i.e. original plaintiffs had filed Special Civil Suit No. 6/1982 before Civil Judge, Senior Division, Latur for specific performance against the present respondents as defendants. However, the said suit was decided on 1.9.1989 and the specific performance and the another relief of refund of consideration were refused therein. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 i.e. original plaintiffs preferred Regular Civil Appeal No. 22/1990 in District Court, Latur. During the pendency of the suit, defendant No. 1 expired and his heirs i.e. defendant No. 1b to 1f were brought on record. Subsequently, the said appeal was allowed by judgment and or...
Mahesh S. Mehta Vs. Harini Co-op. Hsg Soc. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-03-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)BomCR89
Anoop V. Mohta, J.1. The Petitioner has invoked Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short the Act) and prayed as under: 2. Admittedly, there is an agreement between the Petitioner and Respondent No. 1Society dated 07.05.2008 to demolish existing old building and to develop the plot / property as agreed. The basic clauses are as under, which also include Arbitration clause:24. The Developer agree to obtain Plinth Commencement Certificate in respect of the proposed buildings within 3 months of vacating and handing over possession of the premises of the society and to complete the entire construction within eighteen months time period from the date of receipt of full commencement certificate and also obtain occupation certificate and Building Completion certificate provided that the Developer are not prevented from doing the construction for any of the reasons such as:i) War, Civil, Commotion or act of God or any unforeseen circumstances beyond the control of Deve...
icici Bank Limited and Ms. Sangeeta Mhatre, Senior General Manager Vs. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-03-2009
Reported in: 2009(111)BomLR3532; (2009)26VST552(Bom)
Ferdino I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. By consent of parties, heard forthwith. 2. The first grievance as raised by the petitioner herein is that they have made an application for stay and had given various reasons as to why stay should be granted. Their application has been rejected. There is no reasoned order and the order communicated to them is in terms as set out in Exhibit K to the petition. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner draws our attention to Form No. 311 under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 (VAT Act) which is an application for grant of stay and Form No. 312 under Rule 33 which is described asAdmission memo-cum-stay order under Section 26 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax act, 2002. It is pointed ot that the stay is invariably in terms of Form No. 312 and no reasons are given for granting stay or rejecting application for stay. 4. In our opinion, Form No. 311 can only be described as a proforma of the manner in which the application has to be moved by the party. ...
Dr. Dinshah Dhunjishah Gagrat Vs. Viloo Byramji Plumber and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-03-2009
Reported in: 2009(6)BomCR128; 2009(111)BomLR3325
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. The Petition has been instituted in order to seek the revocation or annulment of a grant of probate by this Court on 25th November, 1997.2. Perin Gagrat who died on 31st January, 1987 had two children: the Petitioner who was her son, and Roshan, her daughter. The Second Respondent is Roshan's husband. On 14th January, 1984 a will was admittedly executed by Perin under which a life interest in her estate was created in favour of Roshan upon which the property was to devolve upon the Petitioner. A second will was admittedly executed by the deceased on 19th February, 1986 under which Perin bequeathed her entire estate to Roshan absolutely. This will was registered with the Subregistrar of assurances. The will which forms the subject matter of the dispute is alleged to have been executed by Perin on 21st January, 1987 under which a life interest was created in favour of Roshan after which the property would devolve upon the Second Respondent who was her husband. The ...
Vithal S/O. Hullaji Hivre Vs. Sumanbai W/O. Vithal Hivre
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-03-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)BomCR566
P.R. Borkar, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the husband - original petitioner whose petition for divorce bearing H.M.P. No. 19 of 1984 though decreed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nanded, on 29.03.1986, said judgment and decree is reversed in Regular Civil Appeal No. 121 of 1986 by the II Additional District Judge, Nanded, on 16.04.1990. Present appellant sought divorce from his wife - respondent on the ground of desertion under Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.2. The appellant approached the Court with a case that in 1976, he married the respondent. For one year they lived happily. Thereafter, respondent started picking up quarrels on the petty matters. The appellant and his family members tried to have happy matrimonial atmosphere, but the respondent did not change her attitude. She insisted on separate residence with the appellant from the other members of the family, to which the appellant did not agree. Therefore, in the month of September, 1980, the r...
Britannia Industries Limited, Being a Company Registered Under the Pro ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-03-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)BomCR76; 2009(111)BomLR3245
R.M. Savant, J.1. A short question arises for consideration in the above Petition, namely, whether the commodity, which is given free or extra along with the commodity packed in the standard package, infringes Rule-5 and, Schedule-III of the Standards of Weights & Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977.2. The Petitioner is a company registered under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1913, as then applicable. The Petitioner carries on business inter alia of the manufacture, production, distribution and sale of biscuits and daily products. The Petitioner manufactures biscuits which are popularly known as '50-50 Biscuits' . The said biscuits, at the relevant time, were sold in the standard pack size of 75 grams for a Maximum Retail Price of Rs. 6.50 in addition to the said standard pack size of 75 grams, the Petitioner was giving free cost to the buyers 20% extra of the said 50-50 biscuits i.e. 15 grams The total weight of the biscuits packed therefore was 90 grams.3. On or...
Sau Malti W/O Rajesh Yawalkar and Sau. Durgabai W/O Wamanrao Ganorkar ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-03-2009
Reported in: 2010(1)BomCR117; 2009(4)MhLj984
Vasanti A. Naik, J.1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard finally at the stage of admission, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.2. By this petition, the petitioners impugn the order passed by the Collector, Nagpur, on 10th of February, 2009, disqualifying the petitioners as councillors of the Municipal Council, Mohpa, under the provisions of Section 3(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Local Authority Members Disqualification Act, 1986.3. Few facts giving rise to the petition are stated thus- The petitioners were elected as councillors of Municipal Council, Mohpa, as candidates from the Rashtrawadi Congress Party. After the elections, the respondent No. 1 was designated as a Group Leader of Rashtrawadi Congress + Congress + B.J.P. (B) Aghadi. The petitioner No. 2 was elected as a President of Municipal Council, Mohpa and had tendered her resignation in the month of July, 2005. After her resignation was accepted, the respondent No. 2-Collector, Nagpur,...
BipIn Synthetics Pvt. Ltd., a Company Incorporated Under the Companies ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-03-2009
Reported in: 2009(6)BomCR204; (2009)24VST309(Bom)
Ferdino I. Rebello, J.1. The petitioner is engaged in the business of import of fabrics which are sold after import pursuant to clearance through the Customs on payment of duty within the State of Maharashtra. The State of Maharashtra has enacted Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 (which hereafter shall be referred to as 'BST Act'). Parliament has enacted the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'CST Act').2. By the present petition, the petitioners seek to challenge the levy of Sales Tax on fabrics imported into India on which the Additional Duty of Excise in lieu of Sales Tax has already been paid under the Act of 1957. The petitioners challenge the Constitutional validity of Entry 9 of Schedule 'B' of the Act. At the hearing of this petition, on behalf of the petitioners, the learned Counsel has challenged the levy of Sales Tax on fabrics imported from outside India on the following two grounds:(1) It is firstly submitted that under Section 5(2) of the BST Act, it is open...
The Commissioner of Income Tax - 21 Vs. Uttamchand Jain
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-02-2009
Reported in: 2009(111)BomLR2947; (2009)224CTR(Bom)473; [2010]320ITR554(Bom); [2009]182TAXMAN243(Bom)
J.P. Devadhar, J.1. This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (`Act' for short) was admitted on 29-04-2009 on the following substantial questions of law : a) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 10,35,562/-made on account of alleged unaccounted income from sale of jewellery which are declared under VDIS 1997 b) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in not appreciating the fact that the statement of confession of Vishnudatta Trivedi is backed by the irrefutable evidence in respect of pay-in-slips of the banks, cash deposits and non existence of any stock during the course of survey 2. The assessment year involved herein is A.Y. 1998-1999. 3. The respondent (`assessee' for short) is a Dealer in Diamonds. The assessee had declared diamond jewelery weighing 65.75 carats under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997 (...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »