Mumbai Court January 2016 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.
Shobha Raosaheb Deshmukh Vs. Election Returning Officer and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-06-2016
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard. 2. Rule. 3. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith and the petition is taken up for final disposal. 4. The petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 20.9.2014, delivered by the learned District Judge - 1, Beed by which the Misc. Civil Application filed under Section 27 of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samities Act, 1961 (in short, 1961 Act?) was partly allowed and though respondent No.3 - the originally elected candidate was unseated, the prayer made by the petitioner for being declared elected unopposed? is rejected. 5. The petitioner submits that the elections for the Electoral Division No.3 Umapur, Tq. Georai, District Beed was held and the result of the elections were announced on 17.2.2012, by which respondent No.3 “ Savita Madan Aher was declared elected. 6. The petitioner herein challenged the said election by preferring Misc. Civil Application No.101 of 2012. Contention was that respondent No.3 belongs to the M...
The Oriental Insurance Company, through its Branch Manager Vs. Chandra ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jan-05-2016
Oral Judgment: 1. In W.C.A. (F) Case No. 7 of 2008, the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation/Labour Court at Buldhana, has by its judgment and order dated 19.03.2013 held the appellant Insurance Company jointly and severally liable along with the respondent No.6, the owner of the vehicle, and the employer to pay amount of compensation of Rs.3,45,040/- to the applicants/claimants who are the dependents of the deceased Ramesh Sukhdeo Sonune, who died in the accident on 27.12.2007. The Insurance Company is before this Court challenging the judgment and order to the extent it holds the appellant Insurance Company liable to pay the amount of compensation. 2. On 07.04.2015, this Court condoned the delay and issued notice for final disposal of the matter on the question of jurisdiction of the labour Court to hold the appellant Insurance Company liable to pay the compensation. In view of the fact that the notice for final disposal of the matter was issued upon framing substantial question o...
The Nagpur District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Prashant Ashokr ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jan-05-2016
Oral Judgment: (B.R. Gavai, J. ) 1. The appeal takes exception to the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court dated 4.5.2007 thereby reversing the judgments and orders passed by the learned Labour Court and the learned Industrial Court and allowing the complaint of the respondent no.1-employee. 2. The facts in brief giving rise to the present appeal can be summarised as under:- The respondent no.1-employee (hereinafter referred to as "the complainant") filed a complaint under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as "MRTU and PULP Act ) being Complaint (ULPA) No. 239/1999 contending that his services were orally terminated with effect from 13/14.1.1999. The complainant sought consequential reliefs of reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages. It was the case of the complainant that he was appointed on daily wages with effect from 21.2.1994 as Clerk ...
Manawat Plastics Pvt. Ltd., through its Director Bhawana Manawat Vs. T ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jan-05-2016
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. The appellant “ assessee has filed this appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962, assailing the order dated 12.05.2014 passed by Respondent No. 1 “ The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) and seeking conversion of Shipping Bill under DEEC Scheme to Drawback Scheme to avail export benefit. The CESTAT in the impugned order mentions that the Commissioner denied the conversion as CBEC Circular No. 4 of 2004 dated 16.01.2004 permitted such conversion only when benefit under Duty Exemption Entitlement Certificate Scheme (DEEC Scheme) is denied by DGFT/ Ministry of Commerce or Customs Authorities. After hearing the Consultant for the appellant “ assessee, the CESTAT took note of the contention that the exported goods were examined, their value was verified and the quantity was taken into consideration while allowing clearance. In para 7, it has taken note of the Circular dated 16.01.2004 (supra) and found that the be...
In the matter of various Companies (in Liquidation) and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-04-2016
1. The Official Liquidator has filed a report dated 18th February, 2013 praying for sanction to terminate with immediate effect the services of Shri S.M. Shetty, company paid Group 'D' Peon. According to the Official Liquidator the misconduct against Shri Shetty has been proved considering the report of the enquiry officer and the explanation offered by Shri Shetty and it is grave and of serious nature warranting the punishment of removal from service. The Official Liquidator states that he has also considered the past record of the employee and there are no extenuating circumstances warranting any lenient view. 2. The issue relates to handing over of certain leased assets that were in the factory site of M/s. Otoklin Plants and Equipments Limited (in liquidation) at Kandla, Gandhidham, Gujarat. Let us consider what was the act or omission or misconduct of Shri Shetty which has made the Official Liquidator to recommend the highest punishment that he could grant pursuant to the service ...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›