Mumbai Court August 2010 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.
Union of India, Representing South Eastern Railway, Through General Ma ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
1. By this appeal, the appellant Union of India has challenged the order dated 24th July 1996 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur in Application No. 109/OA-A/ RCT/ NGP/93 whereby appellants have been directed to pay an amount of Rs. 1,85,578/- to the respondent with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of application till the date of order and 6% per annum from the date of order till realization.2. Facts of the case are that the applicant (present respondent) booked 30 lbs untested steel rails from RMCEL siding Barakar to be carried and delivered at Itwari siding, Nagpur. Appellant no.3 accepted the consignment for delivery under RR No. 375092 on 16.4.1990. The wagon was weighed at Harakar Railway Weigh Bridge as per the railway receipt. The said consignment was placed at Itwari Goods Shed under the jurisdiction of South-Eastern Railway on 9.5.1990 sy 06.30 hours and the staff concerned of the applicant Company attended the wagon and found that all packing strip...
Paswara Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (i), Nhava Sheva
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
Per: P.G. Chacko In this application, the appellant prays for condonation of delay of 120 days said to be involved in the filing of their appeal. The appellant has since filed an affidavit stating that the extent of delay of the appeal is 145 days and not 120 days. Both in the application and the present affidavit, the appellant submits that the delay of the appeal was occasioned by non-co-operation of the CHA. It is submitted that the necessary documents (bill of entry etc.) were not supplied by the CHA to enable the appellant to file the appeal. The appellant is said to be located at Meerut and could not visit the SIIB office at Nhava Sheva for collecting the documents seized by the investigating officers. It is submitted that the delay of the appeal, in these circumstances, was beyond the control of the appellant. The affidavit also claims support from the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji (1987) 2 SCC 107. The learned counsel has reiter...
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excis ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
Per: P.G. Chacko This application filed by the appellant seeks waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of duty of over Rs.10.79 crores (with interest) and equal amount of penalty. We examined the records and heard both sides on 13.8.2010. 2.From the submissions made before us, it appears that this is a case fit for remand. Accordingly, after dispensing with pre-deposit, we take up the appeal for final disposal. 3.The appellant is manufacturer of petroleum products including motor spirit (petrol), high speed diesel oil etc. During the period of dispute (July 2005 to February 2008), MS and HSD manufactured in their refinery (Mahul, Mumbai) were marketed to various wholesale dealers through their depots at Wadala, Vashi and Loni. The practice was to convey the petroleum products from the refinery through a pipeline system, viz. Mumbai-Pune Pipeline (MPPL), to the said depots, wherefrom the goods were sold to the wholesale customers. From 6.9.2004, with the withdrawal of ware...
Krishna Trading Co. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Export), Mumbai
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
Per: P.G. Chacko We had directed the appellant to pre-deposit an amount of Rs.1 crore under Section 129E of the Customs Act and report compliance on 16.8.2010 vide order No. S/140-144/2010/CSTB/C-II dated 24.5.2010. There is no evidence of pre-deposit, nor any request for extension of time for making the pre-deposit, nor even representation for the appellant. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed for non-compliance with Section 129E ibid....
Madhukar G. Wagh, Age 71 Years, Scientific Officer/Engineering (Sg), a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-13-2010
1. This petition is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, dated 22062004 in Original Application No.995 of 2004. By the aforesaid order, the Tribunal dismissed the Original Application filed by the petitioner and confirmed the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority, imposing the punishment of dismissal from service against him.2. The petitioner was initially appointed in May 1958 as Senior Scientific Assistant in the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Government of India. Later on, the petitioner was promoted from time to time and in August 1986, he was promoted as Additional Chief Engineer (SO/SG). The petitioner was placed under suspension in August 1987, as he was subjected to a departmental inquiry and was served with the chargesheet on 03081988 containing four articles of charges. At the time when the petitioner was working in Nuclear Power Board, he was placed under suspension by an order dated 24/26th June, 1987. The first charge ...
Raju Kisan Mane Age 28 Years, Vs. State of Maharashtra Through Police ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Aug-13-2010
1. The appellant, in this appeal, challenges the Judgment and order of conviction, passed by the learned District Judge-1 and Additional Sessions Judge Ahmednagar in Sessions Case No.8/2008. The appellant, has been convicted for the offence punishable Under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for six months. This Judgment and order of conviction, is passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge Ahmednagar on October 18, 2008.2. The facts in brief, necessary for consideration of submissions on behalf of the parties, are listed herein below :- (a) The appellant was the original accused. The appellant, is resident of Wadarwadi, Shevgaon District Ahmednagar. The appellant was married to Sangita approximately five years before the incident. The appellant and his wife Sangita were blessed with two children. Gaurav, was around four years old, whereas Aishwarya was ...
Satish S/O Soma Bhole Age 47 Yrs., Murlidhar S/O Shripad Phalak Died T ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-13-2010
1. All these petitions involve common question of law and fact, as such are decided by this common Judgment.2. The respondent Municipal Corporation, Jalgaon ( Erst while Municipal Council ) on or about 17/7/1964 had published a declaration of intention to prepare Town Planning Scheme II. On 17/2/1967, the draft scheme was sanctioned. The Arbitrator was appointed to implement the scheme and on 14/6/1979, the Town Planning Scheme II was sanctioned by the Government. Earlier, prior to the sanction of the Development Plan, original plot No. 526 in Survey No. 170 was reserved for garden. After the Development Plan was sanctioned, owners of land Survey No. 170 ( 18 persons), which was bearing original plot No. 526 were allotted final plot No. 524. Subsequently, these persons, who were allotted final plot No. 524, sold their respective shares. The present petitioners are the purchasers of the undivided share of the original allot tees of plot no. 524.3. The revised Development Plan was sancti...
Salimbhai S/O Mukhtar Jafarbhai Chimthanawala, Aged About 52 Years, Ma ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-13-2010
1. Criminal Revision Application No.143 is presented by the original accused nos.1 and 2 in Criminal Complaint No.4 of 2002, presented by respondent no.1 to the court of Judicial Magistrate (F.C.), Court No.4, at Nagpur. Criminal Revision Application No.268 of 2006 is presented by the original complainant Riyazuddin raising exception to the order passed by the 7th Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur on 10/7/2006, whereby accused nos.3 to 5 have been discharged from Criminal complaint No.4 of 2002 and the proceedings in the said criminal case was ordered to be dismissed as against them. The complainant/respondent no.1 herein presented complaint against five accused complaining commission of offence punishable under Sections 193, 195, 465, 469, read with Section 34, 109 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. It is contended in the complaint by the complainant that he is a Hanafi Sunni Muslim and is a social worker and well known spiritual leader. The allegations in the complaint are s...
The Union of India, Through General Manager, Central Railway, Vs. Smt. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-13-2010
1. Heard submissions at the Bar.2. By means of this appeal, the appellant Union of India is challenging the judgment and award passed in Claim Application No.03/OA II/RCT /NGP/2006 decided by learned Member (J), Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur Bench Nagpur ( in short "the Tribunal") on 19.2.2009 whereby compensation was awarded in the sum of Rs. 4,00,000/ in favour of the respondentsclaimants.3. In support of the appeal, Mr. P. S. Lambat, learned counsel for the appellant, contended that the Tribunal erred in law in awarding compensation as burden of proof was not discharged on behalf of the claimants to establish that deceased was a bona fide passenger and met with an untoward incident as contemplated under section 123 ( c) read with Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989 ( in short "the said Act"). It is contended that photostat copies of ration card and school leaving certificate ought not to have been considered by the Tribunal as they were not duly proved. It is further submitted ...
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pandit Nagorao Ade, Aged About ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-13-2010
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties by consent.2. By the First Appeal No.446 of 2010, the appellants have challenged the judgment and award passed on 24.3.2009 in M.A.C.P. No.100 of 2001 and M.A.C.P.No.40 of 2004. The subject matter of the First Appeal No.1441 of 2009 is also the same common judgment and award. While by First Appeal No.1399 of of 2009, the appellant is challenging the judgment and award dt. 30.3.2009 passed by the M.A.C.T. Pusad in M.A.C.P.No.41 of 2004.3. The grievance of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, after it held the owner and driver of the offending motor vehicle liable to pay compensation to the claimants ought not to have directed the appellant/Insurance Co. to satisfy the award at the first instance and thereafter, to recover the amount of compensation paid from the owner and/or driver of the offending motor vehicle concerned with the accident in question.4. Learned Counsel for the appellant...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »