Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-04-2002
Reported in : 2003BomCR(Cri)882
D.D. Sinha, J.1. Heard Shri Dhote, learned Additional PublicProsecutor for the appellant, and Shri Gupta, learnedCounsel for the respondent.2. The State has filed the instant appeal against thejudgment and order dated 18.10.1989 passed by theAdditional Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Sessions Trial No.70/1996 whereby respondent is acquitted of the offencepunishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code.3. The prosecution case, in nutshell, is as follows :The respondent and deceased Ramesh were theresidents of village Banpuri and their agriculturalfields were adjacent to each other. It is alleged thatthere was a quarrel between them for taking water fromcanal. The incident occurred on 6.12.1985. It isalleged that on that day deceased Ramesh was sitting atabout 9.30 p.m. to 10 p.m. on the flag post. PW 4Doma and Raghoba came there and also sat on the platformof the flag post. After taking meal, people of thevillage normally used to assemble near the flag post forchitchatting. On the day of in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-17-2002
Reported in : 2003(4)ALLMR231; 2003(4)BomCR787; 2003(3)MhLj379
R.G. Deshpande, J. 1. This petition raises an important question pertaining to the provisions of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, and the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, precisely relating to the provisions of Sections 126 and 127 of the M. R. T. P. Act. If for 10 years from the date of final publication of the Development Plan, the land reserved is not acquired by acquiring body or the authority for which it is to be acquired but before issuance of the Notice under Section 127 of the M. R. T. P. Act by the owners, some steps are taken by the acquiring body which thereafter are continued, whether in such a case could be it said that the reservation is lapsed in accordance with the provisions of that Act.2. The facts, in short, necessary can be narrated as under : In the year 1977, Survey No. 114, area 0.93 hectare of mouza Chikhali belonging to the petitioners and their brothers and sisters, was reserved for the purposes of Agricultural Produce Market...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jul-15-2002
Reported in : 2003(1)ALLMR86; 2003(1)BomCR74
P.S. Brahme, J.1. Both these petitions are disposed by this common judgment as in both the petitions challenge is to the promotion to the post of Assistant Pay and Accounts Officer by the respondent, Forest Development Corporation of Maharashtra Limited. 2. The facts which are necessary to decide the controversy involved in these petitions are stated as under: The respondent, Forest Development Corporation of Maharashtra Limited is a company registered under the Indian Companies Act, completely owned by the State of Maharashtra. Initially the State of Maharashtra established Forest Development Board in 1969 as a major step to convert large number of blocks of mixed forest into valuable teak forests. All the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 2503 of 1986 started their service in the Forest Development Board, in that, the petitioners No. 1, 2 and 3 were erstwhile retrenched employees of the State of Maharashtra and as such they were accommodated as Junior Accountants in the Forest Develop...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jul-30-2002
Reported in : (2004)106BOMLR35
Naresh H. Patil, J.1. The petitioners are the original defendants and the respondent is the original plaintiff.2. The brief facts of the case are summarised as under :The plaintiff had filed civil suit for possession of the premises and the recovery of arrears of rent, regarding the premises which were situated in the municipal limits at Raver, District Jalgaon bearing C.T.S. No. 760. The original defendant Ganpat Dagadu Koli was tenant of the suit property. The plaintiffs' case is that in the year, 1949, he had let out the suit premises to Ganpat Koli with a condition that he would occupy the suit premises and in exchange supply him milk. In consideration of the supply of milk, the original tenant Ganpat Koli was to enjoy the extreme western end of the suit premises. Ganpat Koli had occupied the premises and was using the same. He expired in the year, 1960. He neither kept up the promise nor he handed over the possession of suit premises to the plaintiff. After demise of Ganpat Koli, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jul-31-2002
Reported in : 2002(4)ALLMR10; 2003(1)BomCR284
D.B. Bhosale, J.1. All the twenty-four writ petitions involve similar facts and common issues and, therefore, are being disposed of by this common judgment. In these writ petitions, the petitioners are seeking directions to the respondent No. 2 to consider them for admission to the courses in Health Sciences in the reserved categories such as Scheduled Caste, Nomadic Tribe, Other Backward Class, Vimukta Jati etc. and not in the open merit category. Except last five writ petitions bearing lodging Nos. 1634, 1644, 1645, 1646 and 1647 of 2002, in all other petitions, we had issued rule and passed interim orders in terms of prayer Clause (a), thereby directing the respondent No. 2-Director of Medical Education and Research (for short DMER) to consider the petitioners for admission to the courses in Health Sciences in the reserved category, which each of the petitioners has claimed in his/her respective writ petitions, and not in the open merit category. Prayer Clause (a) is identical in al...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-08-2002
Reported in : 2003BomCR(Cri)526; (2003)105BOMLR136
V.K. Tahilramani, J.1. Through this appeal, the appellant is challenging the judgment and order dated 20th February, 1997 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai in Sessions Case No. 28 of 1993. By the said judgment and order, the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-i.d. to suffer R.I. for one month.2. This is a case of double murder. The appellant is convicted for the murder of Vijay Borade, a young boy of 13 years and his father Devidas Borade.3. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is as under:-Devidas Borade (deceased) was residing at Appapada, Ambednagar, Malad, Mumbai alongwith his family members i.e., wife Sudha Borade (P.W. 7), daughter Anita Borade (P.W. 6) and his two sons Ajay (P.W. 8) and Vijay (deceased). The appellant was the neighbour of Devidas Borade.On 21.11.92 at about 8.30 p.m., Devidas Borade was sitting on the Otla of his hou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-09-2002
Reported in : (2004)89TTJ(Mumbai)48
ORDERA.K. JA.IN, J.M.:This appeal has been filed by the department against the order dated 4th Aug., 1994, of the learned Commissioner (Appeals)-XlI, Bombay, for the assessment year 1991-92.2. The department has raised the following grounds of appeal.'1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding that expenditure of Rs. 2.80 lakhs incurred on tele-film is allowable as revenue expenditure disregarding the fact that asset acquired with enduring benefit was to be used for the purpose of advertisement of business.also should have followed the ratio of the decision laid down by the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Patel International Film ITD. : [1976]102ITR219(Bom) .'2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in deleting addition amounting to Rs. 28,117 disregarding the fact that object of expenditure incurred on account of stamp duty related to acqui...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-09-2002
Reported in : (2002)258ITR106(Mum.)
1. This appeal has been filed by the Department against the order dated August 4, 1994, of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XII, Bombay, for the assessment year 1991-92. "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in holding that expenditure of Rs. 2.80 lakhs incurred on tele film is allowable as revenue expenditure disregarding the fact that asset acquired with enduring benefit was to be used for the purpose of advertisement of business. He also should have followed the ratio of the decision laid down by the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Patel International Film Ltd. [1976] 102 ITR 219. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in deleting addition amounting to Rs. 28,117 disregarding the fact that the object of expenditure incurred on account of stamp duty related to acquisition of asset and is assessable...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-29-2002
Reported in : AIR2003Bom178; 2003(2)BomCR148; 2002(4)MhLj615
V.G. Palshikar, J.1. This revision application is directed againstthe order passed in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 6/95 passed on6-8-1996 below (Exh.114) in Regular Civil Suit No. 56/92whereby the order of status-quo was granted. The learnedappellate Court vacating the order of status-quo grantedinjunction in favour of the appellants before it and,therefore, the unsuccessful respondent has come up inRevision under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code.2. When this matter came up for arguments, it wasnoticed that several revisions of such nature are pendingin this Court. All these revisions challenged the orderspassed by the trial Court and the appellate Court eitherwhen they are concurrent or when they are reversing. Thelearned Counsel appearing in the above revisionapplication No. 803/96 desired for some time to argue thematter. Accordingly, the matter was adjourned tilltoday. In the meantime, the office also identified about150 revision applications wherein identical question oflaw arose...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-04-2002
Reported in : AIR2003Bom15; 2002(4)ALLMR617; 2002(6)BomCR637; (2002)4BOMLR760; 2003(1)MhLj804
D.B. Bhosale, J.1. These two writ petitions involve common issue as to whether parties before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short 'Consumer Forum') and Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short, 'State Commission') are entitled to be represented by authorised agents who are not enrolled under the Advocates Act, 1961 and such Authorised Agents have the right of audience. The counsel appearing for the parties confined their arguments only on the aforesaid issue and hence we have not gone into the facts and merits of the complaints filed before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short, 'Consumer Forum') by the petitioners. 2. The petitioners in the first writ petition (Writ Petition No. 1147 of 2002), who are advocates by profession, filed complaint bearing No. 428 of 2000 against respondent Nos. 2 and 3 - tour operators before respondent No. 1-Consumer Forum complaining deficiency in their service. It is the case of the petitioners that after numerous adjourn...
Tag this Judgment!