Mumbai Court April 2011 Judgments
Union of IndiA. Vs. Sharp Menthol India Ltd, and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-06-2011
1) This petition is filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad to challenge the order passed by the Joint Secretary to the Government of India on 21/1/2011 whereby the stay application filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise seeking stay of the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (A) on 14/9/2010 till the disposal of the Revision Application, has been rejected. By order dated 14/9/2010, the Commissioner of Central Excise (A) had held that the respondent No.1 ('the assessee' for short) is entitled to claim rebate of duty paid on export of peppermint oil by debiting the credit of duty paid on inputs used in the manufacture of final products. In the Writ Petition No.8068 of 2010 filed by the assessee seeking implementation of the order of Commissioner (A) dated 14/9/2010, this Court directed the Commissioner to deposit the rebate claim allowed by the Commissioner (A) and accordingly, the Commissioner has deposited in this Court Rs. 38,03,89,634/- towards the re...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Perumal Arsan Madrasi. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Police. and anr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-06-2011
1. Writ Petition is heard finally. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith by consent of the parties. 2. Heard rival arguments of the parties at length. Perused the accompanying documents to the present Writ Petition. Also perused the affidavit filed by the Externing Authority Deputy Commissioner of Police, ZoneIV Ulhasnagar, District Thane , dated 19th November, 2010.3. By the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the externment order passed against him dated 07.09.2010 passed by the Externing Authority DCP ZoneIV Ulhasnagar, District , , Thane and the order dated 03.11.2010 passed by the Appellate Authority confirming the externment order.4. Certain factual position, as emerged out from the documents produced in the Writ Petition, can be narrated in order to have proper perspective of the matter and to decide the challenge to the impugned orders.5. Senior PI Amboli police station, Mumbai submitted a proposal to DCP, ZoneIV, Ulhasnagar, District Thane i.e. Externing Aut...
Tag this Judgment!Babu Hanmanta Marlla @ Kalay. Vs. the State of MaharashtrA.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-06-2011
1. Writ Petition is heard finally. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith by consent of the parties.2. Rival arguments were heard on 23rd March, 2011 and 25th March, 2011. Perused the accompanying documents to the present Writ Petition. Also perused the affidavit filed by the Externing Authority Deputy Commissioner of Police, ZoneIX, Bandra (West), Mumbai dated 24th March, 2011.3. By the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the externment order passed against him dated 15.2.2011 passed by the DCP, ZoneIX, Bandra (W), Mumbai. Challenge to the said impugned order is only on the limited aspect as to no hearing given to the petitioner prior to passing the said order.4. Certain factual position, as emerged out from the documents produced in the Writ Petition, can be narrated in order to have proper perspective of the matter and to decide the only challenge to the impugned order.5. Senior PI Amboli police station, Mumbai submitted a proposal to DCP ZoneIX, Bandra i.e. Extern...
Tag this Judgment!Kamat Hotels (India) Limited. Vs. Royal Orchid Hotels Limited and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-05-2011
1. The suit has been instituted for infringement and passing off. The Plaintiff carries on the business of conducting hotels and restaurants and has a food catering business. The Plaintiff is the owner and proprietor of the trade mark "the Orchid" which is used upon and in relation to a Five Star hotel belonging to the Plaintiff. The essential and prominent feature of the mark is the word "Orchid". According to the Plaintiff in or around December 1995, it conceived and adopted the mark from the name of a flower for use upon and in relation to its hotel which was then under construction at Mumbai. The construction of the first phase of the hotel was complete in 1996. Commercial operations commenced in phases from January 1997. Hence, the Plaintiff claims use of the mark continuously since January 1997. The hotel, which is called The Orchid is stated to be the first Ecotel hotel in Asia. The word 'Ecotel' is recognized as a hallmark of environmentally sensitive hotels. Authority to use t...
Tag this Judgment!Maidan Bacchav Samiti and ors. Vs. Ramchandra Padmakar Vaidya Hall Tru ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-01-2011
ORAL : 1. Petitioner No.1 is a registered society which claims to be established, inter-alia, for protecting open spaces in Thane City, Maharashtra. Petitioner Nos.2 to 4 claim to have been using the suit plot for sports, cultural and other activities. Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 are the trustees of respondent No.1. Respondent Nos.1 to 6 claim to have entered into an agreement with respondent No.7 M/s. Ratnamani Developers Pvt. Ltd. for the development of the land in question which we will presume belongs to respondent No.1. Respondent Nos. 8 to 11 are the Municipal Corporation of the City of Thane, the Commissioner of respondent No.8, the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Thane Region, the Assistant Director of Town Planning of respondent No.8 and the Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai, respectively. 2. The petitioners have filed this Public Interest Litigation, inter- alia, for a Writ of Certiorari to quash the proceedings in respect of change No.M/19 of the suit pl...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Maharashtra Vs. Bhagwat Naroji Chavan and ors.
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Apr-01-2011
Judgment 01. Heard learned counsel for the parties.02. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 6.1.2000 rendered by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Purna, District Parbhani, in Regular Criminal Case No.485 of 1997, thereby acquitting the respondents herein (original accused) for the offences punishable under Sections 326 and 324 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.03. The factual matrix of the matter, which gave rise to the present appeal, is as mentioned below;It is the case of the prosecution that on 27.4.1997 at about 22.00 hours at village Satephal, in front of statue of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, the accused persons, in furtherance of their common intention, asked the complainant Prabhakar Eknathrao Chavan as to why he had filed application for closure of their liquor shop, and they abused him. It is alleged that accused No.1 Bhagwant Chavan assaulted the complainant by an axe, and accused No.2 Dnyaneshwar Chavan caught hold of the complai...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›