Mumbai Court October 2014 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.
The Commissioner of Income tax, Pune Vs. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-2014
A.K. Menon, J. 1. This order disposes of the above two appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the I.T. Act) which involve common questions of law, which read as under:- (1) Whether the decision of the ITAT ignoring the provisions of section 2(24)(x) r/w. 36(1)(va) as per which employee's contribution to ESI, PF and Pension fund is deductible only if payment is made before the due date as prescribed in the respective Act, Rule, Order or Notification governing such funds is erroneous and contrary to provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 ? (2) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in ignoring the clear distinction between employee's contribution to ESI, PF and pension fund and employer's contribution and the fact that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Alom Extrusions Ltd. 319 ITR 306 is applicable only to employer's contribution ? (3) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tri...
Indirabai Narayan Bivalkar, Deceased Through her L.Rs. and Others Vs. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-2014
AnoopV. Mohta, J. 1. Heard finally by consent of the parties, as facts and issues are interlinked and interdependent therefore, this common Judgment. 2. Prayer clauses in these Petitions are as under:- A) In respect of Bivalkars' Writ Petition No.3378 of 1989:- a) .to issue a Writ, direction or Order in the nature of Writ of Certiorari under Article 227 of the Constitution of India or analogous thereto calling for the record of the said Case No.MSKTA13/1989 before the Collector, Raigad, at Alibag, and after making inquiries and looking into the legality of the Order dated 28.2.1989, quash and set aside the same. b) ...to declare that the said impugned Order dated 28.2.1989 passed by the Respondent No.2 above-named in the said Case No. MSKTA13/1989, Exhibit I collective hereto, is bad in law, unlawful without jurisdiction, arbitrary, capricious and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. c) ...to declare that the Respondents above-named are bound and liable to pay to the P...
Indira Sawant and Others Vs. Vijayendra Umakant Sheth and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-14-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. By this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the appellants-claimants seek enhancement of compensation in respect of death of one Vinayak Sawant i.e. husband of appellant No.1 and father of other appellants. He was working as a Head Clerk and expired in a road accident on 11/8/1997. At the time of his death, he was working as Head Clerk with the State Government. The fact that he left behind him widow and four children i.e. total five dependents is not in dispute. Similarly the quantum of amount awarded towards hospitalisation is also not under challenge before this Court in the present appeal. 2. I have heard learned Senior Advocate Shri Lotlikar with Ms. Patil, for the appellants and Advocate Shri Bharne, on behalf of respondent No.3-Insurance Company. Nobody has appeared for respondents No.1 and 2. 3. Advocate Lotlikar has submitted that as number of dependents was 5, by following the settled position in this respect, deduction on account of personal...
Kiran Anandrao Pawar and Others Vs. Chief General Manager, M/s. IRB Ko ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-2014
S.C. Dharmadhikari, J. 1] At the outset we feel compelled to make certain observations not only in relation to these two P.I.Ls but in general about such litigation. We have been observing and noting that citizens claiming to be public spirited and concerned with social, environmental, administrative and planning issues approach this Court complaining about either inaction or deliberate act of omission and commission on the part of the executive. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan V/s. State of Maharashtra and Ors. reported in AIR 2013 Supreme Court 58 held as under: 7. It is a settled legal proposition that a stranger cannot be permitted to meddle in any proceedings, unless he satisfies the Authority/Court, that he falls within the category of aggrieved persons. Only a person who has suffered, or suffers from legal injury can challenge the act/action/order etc. in a court of law. A writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is maintainable eit...
Shah Investments, Financials, Developments and Consultants Pvt. Ltd. a ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-14-2014
R.M. Borde, J. 1. Since both the petitions raise common question for adjudication, both the petitions are considered together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties. 3. In Writ Petition No.7843 of 2014, presented by Shah Investments, Financials, Developments and Consultants Pvt. Ltd., and Control Automation Projects Pvt. Ltd., challenge is raised to the decision taken by Aurangabad Municipal Corporation to declare the petitioner disqualified on consideration of technical bids and further declaring Respondent No.3 as L1 Contractor. Whereas, in Writ Petition No.8211 of 2014 apart from seeking to quash the decision declaring concerned petitioner disqualified on opening the technical bid, a further relief is sought in the nature of issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing the decision awarding contract to Respondent No.3 in pursuance to the Tender Notice20142...
Manoj Vs. Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claim and O ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-14-2014
A.P. Bhangale, J. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside order dt.17.7.2003 passed by respondent no.1/Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claim, Amravati. The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of directions to hold that the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Tribe Thakur community. It appears that the petitioner namely Manoj Narayanrao More, resident of Murtizapur, District Akola claimed as belonging to caste 'Thakur' recognized as Scheduled Tribe on the basis of Caste Certificate issued by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Akola dt.28.6.2002. The petitioner had relied upon the School Leaving Certificate dt.4.7.2001 indicating the caste Thakur mentioned therein and the School Leaving Certificate, dt.19.6.2001 issued in favour of the petitioner shows that he is 'Thakur' by caste and the School Leaving Certificate issued to Narayan Baliram Thakur, father of the petitioner mention...
Dr. Shivdas Vs. State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Higher and ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-14-2014
S.V. Gangapurwala, J. 1. Heard. 2. Vide the present Writ Petition, the petitioner assails the entire selection process and appointments for the post of Assistant Professors in Respondent-College, pursuant to the advertisement dated 20.9.2011. 3. Mr.Gadhe, learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments strenuously put forth following submissions : a) Though the petitioner had applied for the post of Assistant Professor in Sociology, still, the petitioner has locus-standi and right to challenge the entire selection process and appointments made for all the twelve (12) posts in respect of different subjects including Sociology subject as the recruitment was out-come of fraud, manipulation and conspiracy. The learned counsel to buttress his submission relies on the judgment of the Apex Court in a case of "Dr.Ram Tawakya Singh Vs. State of Bihar and others" reported in 2013 CJ (SC) 1000. So also the judgment of the Apex Court in a case of "Raju Ramsing Wasve Vs. Mahes...
Om Prakash Puri Vs. Nandita Puri
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-2014
1. This petition is directed against the order dated 25 September 2013 (impugned order) made by the Family Court at Bandra, awarding the following 'interim maintenance' to the respondent and her minor child: (a) Rs.1,25,000/- per month to the respondent; (b) Rs.50,000/- per month towards the minor child. The aforesaid amount of interim maintenance is over and above the sum of Rs.1,15,000/- towards the actual education and medical expenses of the minor child, which the petitioner has been paying and continues to pay to the respondent and the minor child. 2. Mr. I. A. Sayyed, learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset made a grievance that the respondent has been resorting to a parallel 'media trial' which is occasioning severe prejudice, not merely to the petitioner, but also the proceedings before this Court. Accordingly, he submitted that appropriate restraint orders be made against the respondent in order to prevent her from indulging into such form of media trial. In support ...
Jaihind Comprehensive Educational Institute and Another Vs. Rahul Nivr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-2014
1. Rule returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned Counsel for the parties and at their request taken up for final hearing. 2. By this petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners challenge the judgment and order dated 5.1.2013 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Pune, whereby the appeal filed by the respondent no.1 under Section 9(1)(a) of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act,1977 (for short "the Act") has been allowed. The School Tribunal has set aside the termination order dated 21.7.2012 issued by the petitioners against the respondent no.1 and has directed reinstatement of the respondent no.1 in service, on the post of Lecturer in Civil Engineering, with all consequential benefits of continuity of service from the date of impugned termination. Further the petitioners are also directed to pay backwages to the respondent no.1 from the date of termination till the actual rein...
State Bank of India, Regional Business Office Vs. The Central Governme ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-14-2014
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the respective parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner has that the impugned Award dt.14.2.2014 be quashed and set aside whereby the action of the management of the State Bank of India through its Assistant General Manager, Region VI (Disciplinary Authority) and Deputy General Manager (Appellate Authority) in terminating the services of the workman namely Shri P.C.Mahadole w.e.f. 15.9.2005 was held as illegal and unjustified. The punishment of dismissal from service without notice imposed against the workman was quashed and set aside by the impugned order and the workman was held entitled for reinstatement in service with continuity and also to 25 % backwages from the date of his dismissal from service till the date of his actual reinstatement in service and with all other consequential service benefits. The petitioners were directed to implement the Award within one month from the date of noti...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »