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.
Charansing @ Chnya S/O Indersing Kadewale Age 36 Years, Vs. the State ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Aug-13-2010
1. This appeal is filed challenging the final judgment and order dated 28.11.2008, passed by the Additonal Sessions Judge, Nanded in Sessions Case. No. 76 of 2008, by which the appellant-accused is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and is sentenced to undergo R.I. for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, i/d to undergo further S.I. for two months.2 .The brief facts of the case are as under:- One Sunita Pawar, PW 1, daughter-in-law of Vitthal Pawar (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as the 'deceased") resides at Tirupatinagar, Dhanegaon alongwith her family members i.e. her husband, brother-in-law, mother-in-law. The appellant (accused) Charansingh resides near house of PW 1 Sunita. Accused owns a auto rickshaw. At the time of Dasara festival, Ankush, brother- in-law of PW 1 Sunita, had taken the Auto Rickshaw of accused for plying. While running the said Rickshaw by Ankush, the rickshaw met with an accident and it got damaged. Accused had deman...
Mohammad Javed Abdul Wahid ) Shaikh, Vs.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-13-2010
1.In this appeal there is a challenge to the judgment and order dated 29/5/09 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai in Sessions Case No. 1138 of 2001.2. According to the prosecution on 2/9/2001 one Papa was murdered by the appellant along with two others. C. R. No. 125 of 2001 was registered at Shivaji Nagar Police Station against all the three accused under Section 302 of the IPC. The appellant is original accused 2.3. It appears that original accused 1 to 3 raised the plea during remand that they were juveniles when the offence was committed before the concerned Metropolitan Magistrate. The appellant produced birth certificate dated 6/8/84. The police submitted a report stating that their inquiry revealed that accused 1 to 3 were not juveniles . Learned Magistrate found that the appellant's birth certificate was forged. He committed the case to the Sessions Court, Greater Bombay.4. Accused 1 filed an application before the Sessions Court praying that since he was a juvenile when t...
Eknath S/O Bhagwan Hatkar Age 31 Years, Vs. the State of MaharashtrA. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-13-2010
1. This appeal is filed challenging the final judgment and order dated 16-10-2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon in Sessions Case No. 199 of 2007, whereby the appellant / accused is convicted for the offence punishable under section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- i/d to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. The accused is also convicted for the offence punishable under section 498-A of IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- i/d to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months.2.The factual matrix of the prosecution case is as under : . Deceased Anita Eknath Hatkar was the wife of accused Eknath. Their marriage was performed before 10 to 12 years ago. Anita Hatkar used to do labour work and was maintaining herself. Accused Eknath was suspecting chastity of his wife. He was not allowing victim Anita to go for labour work. Anita was...
Vazir Polymers Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Customs (imports), Mumbai- ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-13-2010
Per: P.G. Chacko, Member (J) 1. In this application filed by the appellant, waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery have been prayed for in respect of duty of Rs.1,26,18,122/- (with interest) demanded by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs in letter dated 12/02/2008. It appears from the records that the original authority had made an order of provisional assessment without quantifying the amount of duty against the assessee and that the appellate authority sustained that order, again, without quantification of duty. The duty was quantified subsequently and demanded from the assessee vide the Assistant Commissioner’s letter dated 12/02/2008 (received on 26/02/2009). 2. After hearing both sides, we are of the view that the appeal itself requires to be finally disposed of at this stage. Accordingly, after dispensing with pre-deposit, we take up the appeal. 3. The appellant had imported 83 consignments of LDPE/HDPE mixed granules/powder (floor sweepings) from Kuwait. The relevan...
Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolhapur Vs. M/S Dr. Writers Food Prod ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-13-2010
Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Revenue has filed this appeal. 2. The facts of the case are that the respondents were engaged in manufacturing of cocoa and cocoa preparations viz. Chocolates as job worker of M/s Cadbury India Ltd. and also availing the CENVAT credit on duty paid inputs and capital goods. On verification of cenvatable inputs/ packing material invoices and CENVAT Credit accounts, it was noticed that the respondents maintained two different sets of account i.e. one at factory and another one which was submitted to the Range Office along with monthly ER-I returns and the entries made in the above two accounts were found to be different and it was further noticed that the respondents availed excess/double CENVAT credit of Rs.8,25,698/- during the period from January, 2003 to May, 2004. During the course of scrutiny of the records by the Audit, it was also noticed that the actual stock of packing material, on which the respondents availed CENVAT credit, was less than t...
M/S K.C. Metal Industries, Ram Mandir Industrial Estate, Vs. the Commi ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-2010
1. This is a Reference under section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 made by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai to seek the decision of this Court on the following substantial question of law :" Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on the basis of the evidence placed on record the Tribunal was justified in coming to the conclusion that the impugned sale was not a sale covered by Section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ?" The facts:2. The Applicant M/s K. C. Metal Industries carries on the business of manufacture and sale of copper strips and bars. In respect of the said business, the Applicant is registered under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 ("the BST Act" for short) as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ("the CST Act" for short).3. Pursuant to an order received from M/s Mody Sons Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai, the Applicant supplied goods worth Rs.26,86,615/ to their branches situated at Vapi and Silvasa (referred to as "works" by the Ap...
Godrej and Boyce Mfg.Co.Ltd. Mumbai. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-2010
1. Section 14A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 stipulates that in computing the total income of an assessee, no deduction shall be allowed in respect of expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to "income which does not form part of the total income under this Act." Subsection (2) enables the Assessing Officer to determine the amount of expenditure incurred in relation to such income which does not form part of the total income in accordance with the method that may be prescribed by the Rules made under the Act if the Assessing Officer is not satisfied with the correctness of the claim of the assessee, having regard to the accounts of the assessee. By subsection (3), the provisions of subsection (2) are also to apply to a situation in which the assessee claims that no expenditure has been incurred in relation to income which does not form part of the total income under the Act. Section 14A was introduced by an amendment to the Finance Act of 2001 with retrospective effect from 1...
Dinkar Fakirrao Adhav Age: 60 Yrs. Vs. Vimal Dinkar Adhav, Age: 46 Yrs ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Aug-12-2010
1) Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties.2) By the present petition, filed by the petitioner/husband (original Opponent), under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India, prayed to quash and set aside the Judgment and order dated 1.1.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions, Sangamner, in Criminal Revision Application No.7/2007, thereby granting maintenance of Rs.600/ per month to the respondent/wife herein (original applicant) from 12.7.2005.FACTUAL MATRIX :3) The petitioner herein married with the respondent on 22nd January, 1980 as per the Hindu religious rites since his earlier wife, viz. Kesarbai had expired. However, it is alleged that since the petitioner herein refused and neglected to maintain the respondent/wife, the respondent/wife filed an application, being Criminal Misc. Application No.335/2005 for grant of maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sangamner on 12.7.2005 and copy thereof. is produced at E...
Mohammed Anis Ul Haq S/O Manzul Ul Haq, Aged About 33 Years, Vs. Asma ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-12-2010
1.By this writ petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, the petitioner husband has challenged the order dated 01.10.2009 passed by Family Court No. 4, Nagpur in Petition No. A889/2008 below Exh. 16, directing him to pay interim maintenance of Rs.2,500/ per month to the respondent wife from 15.07.2009. The matter was initially presented as Criminal Revision Application under Section 397 read with Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code and on 04.03.2010, it has been converted into a Writ Petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India.2. Looking to the nature of the controversy, Shri Qureshi, learned counsel for the petitioner husband and Shri Shams, learned counsel for the respondent wife, requested that the matter should be taken up for final hearing. Accordingly, the parties have been heard by making rule returnable forthwith. 3. The marriage between the parties was solemnized at Nagpur as per Islamic Law on 22.12.2006. The respondent wife has filed Petition No. ...
Gajraj Babunandan Varma and anr. Vs. M/S.igloo Cold Storage and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-2010
1. The petition has been filed against the order of the Industrial Court dated 30.9.1997 in Revision Application (ULP) No.33 of 1996. The revision application filed by the respondent No.1 hereinafter referred to as the respondent, has been allowed and the order of the Labour Court in Complaint (ULP) No.635 of 1988 has been set aside.2. It appears that this petition was heard finally on 20.1.2009 when this Court recorded that the petition was not being pressed at the instance of petitioner No.2 who apparently had settled the dues with the 1st respondent. The petition was allowed in the absence of the respondents and hence an L.P.A. was filed by the respondent. On 16.7.2009 that L.P.A. was allowed with certain directions and the writ petition was restored to the file of this Court. Therefore, the petition is being considered only in respect of petitioner No.1 Gajraj Babunandan Verma (hereinafter referred to as "the petitioner").3. A complaint was filed by the Dyes & Chemical Workers Unio...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »