Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1993(3)BomCR387; (1993)IILLJ568Bom
1. These are two writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the employer and the workmen respectively, challenging the Award of the National Industrial Tribunal dated April 8, 1991 made in reference No. NTP-2 of 1987. Since the two writ petitions are in the nature of cross-petitions, the parties shall, hereinafter, be referred to as they are arrayed in Writ Petition No. 2416 of 1991, in which the Petitioner is the employer, Respondent No. 1 is the Presiding Officer, National Industrial Tribunal, Bombay and Respondents 2 to 8 are Trade Unions/Associations representing the present and past workmen of the Petitioner Employer. 2. A Company Know as ICI(India) Pvt. Ltd. was incorporated some time in 1926. Between 1939 to 1961, three Indian subsidiaries, by name (1) Alkali and Chemicals Corporation of India Ltd., (2) Indian Explosives Ltd. and (3) Chemicals and Fibers of India Ltd., of the parent U.K. Company were set up in India. In 1982, the other subsidiary comp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2005(5)BomCR725
Deshpande D.G., J.1. I had earlier framed two Issues as Preliminary Issues. They are :(1) Whether the suit is maintainable in view of Section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act; In the said order Section 67 was quoted. By consent it was corrected.(2) Whether the suit is maintainable in as much as the plaintiff has filed the present suit No. 2812 of 2001 without withdrawing his earlier Suit No. 1991/2000 for the same cause of action.2. I heard Advocate Mr. Sen, appearing for the plaintiff; Advocate Mr. Dhakephalkar, appearing for defendant No. 13; Advocate Mr. Sanjay Jain, appearing for defendant No. 22; and defendant No. 7 in person. Following is the background for raising the preliminary objections.Plaintiff Jayesh Pandya was the real estate broker. He was doing a business in the name of Pandya & Shah Associates. A partnership firm, in the name and style of M/s. Hetali Construction Company came to be formed in, 1992. One Ms. Jaikirti Mehta was a partner with 10% share; the plaintiff and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1992(1)BomCR475
E.S. Da Silva, J.1. The petitioner is challenging by this writ filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution the judgment of the Administrative Tribunal dated 13-6-1991 which has unsettled the judgment of the Addl. Rent Controller dated 26-2-1986 whereby he rejected with costs the respondent No. 1's (hereinafter called the respondent) application seeking for the recovery of possession of the suit house on the ground of bona fide personal requirement.2. It was the case of the respondent that the property called 'Galoum' situated at Mapusa and consisting of a residential house had been rented to the petitioner by his late father sometime in the year 1953. On his death the same was inherited in co-ownership by him and his three brothers who, by Deed dated 26-3-1976 effected the partition of the estate of their father and as a result whereof the suit house was allotted to him and to his brother Leonardo. Subsequently Leonardo gifted his rights to the house in favour of the responden...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1992(1)BomCR485
..... that the petition is time-barred as it stands today.10. mr. tulzapurkar, learned counsel for the petitioners, also relied upon the judgment of this court in the case of indo-pharma pharmaceuticals works private limited v. pharmaceutical company of india 80 bom.l.r. 87, where it was inter alia held as under:---'when the issue of prior continuous user .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2009ACJ585; 2008(6)MhLj941
..... negligently gave a dash to the motor-cycle and resultantly he sustained injuries. a case under sections 279, 337 and 338 of the indian penal code was registered with the police station, udgir. the appellant resultantly of the accident sustained permanent disability to the extent of 48%. he filed a petition under section 166 of the motor vehicles act, 1988 being .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR2006Bom190; 2006(3)ALLMR18; 2006(3)BomCR156; 2006(3)MhLj609
D.B. Bhosale, J.1. The principal question, which arises for determination in this Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, is whether the Judgment prepared by a member of the Division Bench and thereafter signed by the other member can be pronounced by him even after the other member of the Bench ceases to be a Judge of this Court. The question as to maintainability of the Letters Patent Appeal (for short, 'LPA') was also raised, in the course of arguments, contending that by no stretch of imagination the order, impugned in the appeal, can be treated as a Judgment within the meaning of clause 15 of the Letters Patent.2. The factual matrix, giving rise to the aforesaid questions, briefly stated, is as follows. A Division Bench of the learned Chief Justice Mr Dalveer Bhandari (as His Lordship then was) and Mr S.J. Vazifdar, J. heard Public Interest Litigation No. 10 of 2005 and upon conclusion of the arguments, reserved the judgment. The judgment was thereafter prepared by S.J.Vazif...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1994Bom141; (1993)95BOMLR337; 1993(1)MhLj958
ORDERH. D. Patel, J. 1. A common question arose in the aforesaid four Letters Patent Appeals about their maintainability under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent (Bombay) before the Division Bench consisting of H. W. Dhabe and A. A. Desai, JJ. By judgment delivered on 6-2-1989, one of the Judges of the Division Bench, namely, Dhabe, J. expressed his opinion by giving reasons that all the four appeals under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent are maintainable. The other Judge, that is, Desai, J., however, gave his opinion on 26-11-1992 in the following words : 'Having regard to the view as then taken in the case of Jaitunbi, I hold that the appeals are not maintainable. I, therefore, dismiss the same.'It becomes necessary to point out that the case of Jaitunbi wd/o Mohammed Ismail v. Smt. Halimabi w/o Yusuf Baig Letters Patent Appeal No. 14 of 1983 with other connected appeals was heard and decided by the Division Bench consisting of Quazi and Desai, JJ. on 21-8-1988. In that case my brother D...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : I(2001)DMC646
Ranjana Desai, J. 1. In this appeal judgment and order dated 24.1.2000, passed by the learned Single Judge in F.A. No. 377 of 1990 is under challenge. The appellant is the original defendant and the respondent is the original plaintiff. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to in this judgment as per their status in S.C. Suit No. 3378 of 1983.2. S.C. Suit No. 3378 of 1983, out of which the present appeal arises, was filed by the plaintiff-wife against the defendant-husband for a mandatory injunction for removing him along with his belonging from Flat No. 9, Datta Vijay Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Mahatma Phule Road, Mulund (East) Bombay-400 081 ('the suit flat' for short).3. Before we deal with the merits of the case, it will be necessary to state that during the pendency of the instant proceedings, the marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant is dissolved by a decree of divorce. Since the suit pertains to a flat to which both the plaintiff and the defend...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1995CriLJ3683
..... the appellant, giving the benefit of doubt to the other three obscurely. in the case in hand, no immediate disclosure to any one including parents and report to police. therefore, the case cited supra is not of any assistance to prosecution. similarly, the other case of krishana lal : 1980crilj926 (cited supra) is also not applicable ..... given in chapter xxi of the code-sections 252 to 258 of the code) noticed above it is clear that in a warrant case instituted otherwise than on a police report 'discharge' or 'acquittal' of accused are distinct concepts applicable to different stages of the proceedings in court. the legal effect and incidents of 'discharge' and ..... aged 13 years to the ashram of the applicant no. 2 shri kripaluji maharaj. 4. on 10th may, 1994, shri purushottam wasudeo deshpande lodged report with the police station, dhantoli, nagpur, alleging that his two young daughters, namely hema and meera were kidnapped by the applicant no. 1 priya sharan maharaj in connivance with one .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
..... custody or control all the property, effects and actionable claims to which the company is or appears to be entitled. he has very wide powers including seeking assistance of the police for taking possession of the company's properties and effects. sub-section 2 of section 456 states that all the property and effects of the company shall be deemed to .....
Tag this Judgment!