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 : 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 : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-03-2002
Reported in : (2004)(1)SLJ152CAT
1. By the present O.A. the applicant is challenging the notification dated 11.10.2001 issued by Respondent No. 1 appointing Respondent No. 4 i.e. V.T. Thomas of the State Forest Service of Goa to the Indian Forest Service with immediate effect.2. The applicant was initially appointed as Assistant Conservator of Forests on adhoc basis vide order dated 20.1.1987 and has been working as Assistant Conservator of Forests/Deputy Conservator of Forests in the Goa Forest Department. The applicant was appointed on regular basis as ACF from 8.8.1990 and was confirmed on 8.8.1992 vide order dated 1st September, 1999 after completion of two years of probation. The State Forest Service Assistant Conservator of Forests (ACF for short)/Deputy Conservator of Forests (DCF for short) is the feeder grade for promotion to the IFS, The promotion to the IFS from the feeder grade is regulated by the Indian Forest Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1966 and Indian Forest Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-02-2002
Reported in : 2003(162)ELT25(Bom); 2003(2)MhLj84
V.C. Daga, J.1. This petition is directed against the order of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai ('CEGAT' for short) dated 20-4-1989, upholding the order of the Collector of Customs, except modification of reducing the redemption fine of Rs. 10 lakh to Rs. 5 lakh in respect of the order dated 13-6-1988.THE FACTS 2. The facts leading to filing of the petition in nutshell are as under, The petitioners are the exporters of 'Colour Picture Tubes' ('CPT' for short) to USSR. They were awarded contract for supply of CPT to USSR sometime in the month of December 1987. On 23rd February 1988, they entered into a contract with one M/s Samsung Co. Ltd. of Korea ('M/s Samsung' for short) for import of CPT to fulfil their obligation under the said contract. Accordingly, on 29-2-1988, the petitioners opened irrevocable Letter of Credit in favour of M/s Samsung for import of CPT.3. Upon publication of the new Import policy on 30th March 1988, petitioner No. 1 came to kn...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Nov-01-2002
Reported in : [2003]113CompCas401(Bom); [2004]54SCL219(Bom)
R.J. Kochar, J.1. The petitioner is a learned advocate practising in the City Civil Court and in the High Court. He has filed the present two petitions under Section 439 read with Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, alleging failure on the part of the companies to pay his debt as mentioned in the petition which according to him is the amount of his professional fees payable by the companies as per his memo dated March 24, 2001. The petitioner appears to have been practising law for a period of 35 years. According to him, ordinarily he does not accept any High Court brief without advance payment of Rs. 10,000. He has further averred that since he knew Shri Sharma, the manager of the company at his request certain small amounts were accepted by the petitioner in the beginning and work was done by him. According to the petitioner, the bills for the professional work done by him were absolutely reasonable considering the fact of the number of years of practice which he has put...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-11-2002
Reported in : (2003)ILLJ619Bom
R.J. Kochar, J.1. Heard the learned advocates for the parties. Rule. By consent Rule is made returnable forthwith in view of the nature of the Petitions which are being disposed of at this stage itself.2. The Petitioners, the Head Mistress of Fatimadevi English High School and the Trustees and the Secretary of Lucy Education Society, are aggrieved by the impugned Judgment and Order passed by the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 in Appeals filed by the respondent-Teachers against the Order dated December 29, 2000 passed by the Controlling Authority under the Act.3. The respondent-Teachers having put in total service of 39 years, 38 years and 34 years respectively in the School, stood superannuated on May 5, 1997, January 31, 1998 and September 20, 1999 respectively. According to them, they were entitled to get gratuity but on failure of the Petitioners to pay they approached the Controlling Authority for the purpose of getting gratuity. It appears that the Con...
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 : 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 : 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 : Jul-15-2002
Reported in : AIR2002Bom502; 2003(1)BomCR140; 2003(1)MhLj373
ORDERA.M. Khanwilkar, J.1.This Civil Revision Application takes exception to the order dated March 19, 2002 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Palghat below Exh. 1 in Special Civil Suit No. 9 of 2002. This special Civil Suit has been filed by the Respondent for declaration and specific performance and consequential reliefs against the Applicants. The Applicants Nos. 1 and 3 are the English Public Limited Companies incorporated under the English Law. Whereas, the Applicant No. 2 is an Indian Company and having its office at Mumbai; and whereas, the Respondent Company is incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at Mumbai. The Respondent claims that it is engaged in the business of manufacture, sale, marketing and distribution of pharmaceutical products. The Respondent has its manufacturing facilities located at various places, including at Palghat. By a 'Distribution Agreement' dated August 1, 1997, the parties agreed to gi...
Tag this Judgment!