Mumbai Court September 2012 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.
Abhay Madhukar Murkhe Vs. Mumbai Municipal Corporation Through Its Mun ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
Oral Judgment: (Chief Justice) Rule, returnable forthwith. Ms. Modle waives service of Rule for the respondent-Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. In the facts and circumstances of the case the petition is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner belongs to Special Backward category. He suffers from disability of 100% hearing impairment. There is no dispute about the fact that the respondent Corporation has reserved posts of clerks for persons with disabilities as required under the provisions of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. The respondent-Municipal Corporation had issued an advertisement in the year 2008 and invited applications for the posts of clerk including for the posts of clerk reserved for three different disabilities i.e. visual disability, hearing impairment disability and locomotive disability. The petitioner had applied in response to the advertisement for the post reserved for persons...
M/S. Mather and Platt (i) Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
S.J. Vazifdar, J. 1. This is a Reference under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, arising from the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No.5873/Bom/86 and ITA 6060/Bom/86, relating to the assessment year 1983-84. The applicant-assessee and the respondent-Department filed two separate reference applications each. The Tribunal drew up a statement of case seeking the opinion of this Court on the following questions which were at the assessee's request: “(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the expenses incurred by the employee after reaching the place of destination including stay expenses was to be treated as disallowance u/s 39 read with Rule 60? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that reimbursement of medical expenses form part of salary / remuneration for computing disallowance u/s. 40(c)? (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstanc...
Godrej Industries Limited and Others Vs. ColIn Mario Rebello and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
M. Jamdar, J. 1. These four appeals arise from the orders passed in two Arbitration Petitions, which were heard together by the learned single Judge. By the impugned order dated 11 May 2012, the learned single Judge has allowed the arbitration petitions and has restrained the appellants from in any manner dealing with certain shares of Gharda Chemicals Ltd. The issues raised in these appeals being common, they are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment. 2. Arbitration Petition No.444 of 2012 was filed by Jer Rutton Kavasmaneck and Darius Rutton Kavasmaneck. Arbitration Petition (L) No.398 of 2012 was filed by Colin Rebello. Godrej Industries and Aban and Percy Kavasmaneck were contesting respondents in the petitions. These two sets of respondents in the arbitration petitions have filed the present four appeals. Along with the appeals we have also taken up two Arbitration Applications filed by Jer and Darius Kavasmanecks, and Colin Rebello under section 11 of the Arbitra...
Rajendra A. Shah (H.U.F.) (Constituent) Vs. M/S. Angel Capital and Deb ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
Oral Judgment: The Petitioner (original Respondent) has challenged award dated 17th February, 2009 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal constituted under the Bye-laws, Rules and Regulations of National Stock Exchange of India (for short “NSEIL”). 2. The basic case of the Applicant/Petitioner is as under: The Petitioner is a constituent and the Respondent is a trading member. A Member Client Agreement was executed in June, 2004. as there was debit of Rs.9,16,685/- on 31st March, 2008 in the NSE FandO segment in the account of Petitioner-original Respondent and as no payment made though demanded and therefore, arose dispute. The Respondent filed the claim/reference. It was contested and counter claim was also raised. 3. The Respondent has also stated that he had given the collateral securities worth Rs.16 lacs, which were lying with the Claimant from the year 2007 onward. The Respondent admitted on 21st January, 2008, due to the collapse of market was asked to pay Rs.10 lacs immed...
Dnyaneshwar M. Satav Vs. Jalindhar Dgondiba Kharabi and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
Rule. The contesting respondent waives service. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith. Since the office report is that service is complete, with the consent of parties appearing through advocates, the writ petition is disposed of finally by this judgment. 2} By this writ petition under Article 226 and Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune in Gram Panchayat Appeal No.68 of 2011 dated 20th December 2011, confirming the view and order of the Collector dated 15th June 2011 in Application No.14 of 2011. 3} The proceedings are under the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958 (for short “the Act”). 4} The petitioner states that the elections to Gram Panchayat, Kharabwadi, Taluka Khed, District Pune were held and the petitioner was elected. This was a general election of the Gram Panchayat, which was notified on 30th June 2010. The seat in question, namely, Ward No.4 was unreserv...
M/S. Tanna Exports Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
S.J. Vazifdar, J. 1. This is a Reference under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arising out of the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) dated 23rd November, 1994 in ITA No.763/Bom/1992 pertaining to the assessment year 1989-1990. The Tribunal on the assessee's application drew up the statement of claim and framed the following question for the opinion of this Court:- “Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that while computing the profits for the purpose of deduction u/s. 80HHC, interest income of Rs.40,20,418/- was required to be excluded?” 2. The applicant-assessee is engaged in the business of export, inter-alia, of rice, green peas and hardware. The assessee filed its return of income of Rs.8,44,690/- on 31st October, 1989 and a revised return on 7th March, 1990, declaring an income of Rs.4,46,920/-. The Assessing Officer, by an order dated 21st January, 1991, assessed the total inco...
Vishwanath Madhukar Shelar Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
Oral Judgment: [V.M. Kanade, J.] 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant and the learned APP appearing on behalf of the Respondent-State. The Appellant is the original Accused who was convicted by the 3rd Ad-Hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur for he offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life. He was also directed to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. 2. The brief facts are that the Appellant married the deceased Kalpana after his first wife Pushpa expired. The Appellant had one daughter and one son from his first marriage and one son from the second marriage. The Accused was running a Panshop, which was situated at a distance of 1 Km. from his house. 3. The prosecution case is that on 9-1-2004, the complainant Ganpati Krishna Kirolkar went to the house of the Accused and met the Appellant's wife Kalpana and thereafter he took meal at about...
Hemant Ganeshprasad Jaiswal Vs. Murlidhar Govind Khade
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule, with the consent of the parties made returnable forthwith and heard. 2. The writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of Constitution of India is invoked against the order dated 29th December, 2011 passed by the learned 5th Jt. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nashik, by which order the application filed by the respondent under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure came to be allowed and resultantly the decree passed in Spl. Civil Suit No.595 of 2007 dated 10th February, 2009 came to be set aside. 3. The facts necessary to be cited for adjudication of the above petition can in brief be stated thus:- The suit in question being Special Civil Suit No.595 of 2007 was filed for specific performance of the Agreement for Sale dated 6.2.2006. The said Agreement for Sale was in respect of the land admeasuring 41 R. situated at Mouja - Gangapur, District Nashik consideration for which was Rs.5,71,000/-out of which the petitioner herein who was the orig...
Ventura Securities Ltd. Vs. M/S. Centpercent Investment Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
Oral Judgment:- The Petitioner-original Applicant has challenged Award dated 15th December, 2010, passed by the Arbitral Tribunal in the matter of Arbitration under the Bye-laws, Rules and Regulations of National Stock Exchange of India Limited (For short “NSEIL”), whereby rejected the claim and the counterclaim. 2. The basic events are as under: The Petitioner is member of the National Stock Exchange of India Ltd., as well as the Bombay Stock Exchange Limited (for short “BSEL”). On 3rd September, 2007, the Respondent appointed the Petitioner as its share and stock broker to effect transactions in shares and securities at the NSEIL as well as the BSEL on the Cash Market Segment, as well as, Futures and Options (F and O) Segment. On 4th September, 2007, the Respondent requested the Petitioner to create an Email ID on the website of the Petitioner. Accordingly, the Petitioner created an Email ID on its website. Pursuant to the said appointment and the instructions...
Yash Tejpal Shah and Others Vs. M/S. Shree Ashtavinayak Cine Vision Lt ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
1. The applicants are the Judgment Creditors under a Consent Award dated 29th October, 2011 executed by and between the applicant and respondent No.1 as the Judgment Debtor under which Rs. 41 crores was to be paid by Respondent Nos.1 and 2 with interest thereon @ 27% p.a. from 1st October, 2011 until payment The Consent Award constitutes a money decree. A paramount lien is created in favour of the Applicants under clause 2 of the Award on the income of the respondent No.1 from various films which he would produce. The payment of installments as agreed by and between the parties came to be set out in the Award. It was specifically provided that upon committing default of any one installment on those dues dates the entire outstanding amount would become due and payable and the award would become executable. First three installments were paid. Thereafter there was defaults. Further time was asked for and granted under letters of the parties which correspondence is admitted. Rs. 36.26 cror...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »