Court : Mumbai
1. By the testamentary petition bearing No.604 of 2005 filed by Mr.Jivaji Framroze Tarachand and Khurshed Naval Wadia, they applied for probate of the alleged last Will and Testament dated 27th December, 2004 of Mr. Jimmy Keki Tarachand (hereinafter referred to as the said deceased). During the pendency of the testamentary petition, Mr. Jivaji Framroze Tarachand expired. The original caveator Mr. Minoo S. Mistry also expired. Legal heirs of the said original caveator were brought on record in place of the original caveator. In view of the caveat filed by the original caveator, the testamentary petition has been converted into testamentary suit (85 of 2005). Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this suit are as under :- 2. Mr. Jivaji F. Tarachand was paternal uncle of Mr. Jimmy Keki Tarachand. Mr. Dinshaw S. Mistry and Mr. Minoo S.Mistry were maternal uncle of the said deceased Mr. Jimmy Keki Tarachand. Mr. Khurshed N. Wadia was son of the predeceased paternal uncle of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1965)67BOMLR484
Naik, J.1. The appellant, who would hereafter be called the accused, was convicted under Section 471 read with Section 394(1)(a)(ii) of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 201, in default, to undergo 15 days' rigorous imprisonment. The accused has preferred an appeal from the order of conviction and sentence. It was noticed that the vires of Section 394 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act was called in question, and, therefore, a notice was issued to the Advocate-General. The learned Government Pleader has appeared on behalf of the State as also on behalf of the Advocate-General. 'When the matter came up for hearing before me sitting singly, a request was made by Mr, Ganatra on behalf of the accused, and also by the learned Government Pleader that, in view of the importance of. the question involved, the case may be referred to a Division Bench. Accordingly, the criminal appeal has been referred to a Division Bench, and, that is how, the matter h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
1. The Plaintiff is a subsidiary of Whirlpool Corporation, a Company incorporated under the laws of the United States. According to the Plaintiff Whirlpool Corporation is one of the world's leading manufacturers of home appliances globally and a pioneer in the manufacture and sale of washing machines. According to the Plaintiff, it is a pioneer in India for washing machines and manufactures all three types of washing machines viz. semi automatic, fully automatic (top loading) and a fully automatic (front loading) targeting different segments of consumers. 2. According to the Plaintiff, it has obtained two design registrations i.e. Nos. 223833 and 223835 which are annexed at Exhibits A1 and A2 at pages 40 and 45 of the Plaint (the said designs). The said design registrations are valid, subsisting and in force for a period of ten years from 15th July, 2009, and their validity can be extended for an additional period of five years thereafter. In or about June, 2012, the Plaintiff came acr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
1 Rule. Respondent waives service. By consent Rule is made returnable forthwith.2 A short but interesting question of law arises for determination in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India which is directed against an order dated 15th October 2010 delivered by the 12th Labour Court, Bombay in Reference (IDA) No.364 of 2004. The question of law can be framed thus: "Whether two distinct category of employees i.e one suspended pending departmental enquiry and other facing a de-novo inquiry in Court in a reference challenging his dismissal, can be equated, so as to permit the latter to claim subsistence allowance till conclusion of the reference u/s 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947?"3 In other words, can such employee be held to be suspended pending enquiry into charges of misconduct so as to enable him to claim subsistence allowance.4 A few facts need to be set out to decide the above framed question. The respondent was employed as higher grade clerk/typi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
1. This reference made by an order dated 23 December, 2010 of a Division Bench of this Court raises the following questions :- 1) Whether the power to search, seize and seal "any other material object" conferred by Section 30 of the Pre- conception and pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 includes the power to search, seize and seal an ultrasound machine or any other machine or equipment, if the Appropriate Authority or Authorized Officer has reason to believe that it may furnish evidence of the commission of an offence punishable under the Act? 2) Whether the decision of a Division Bench of this Court at Aurangabad Bench in Dadasaheb (Dr.) s/o Popatrao Tarte v. State of Maharashtra and others, 2010 (2) Mah. L.J. 110 taking the view that Section 30 does not confer such power in respect of an ultrasound machine lays down the correct law? 2. The brief facts leading to filing of this writ petition are not in dispute. The petitioner is a Gynecologist ru...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2007)106ITD408(Mum.)
1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 31.7.2000 of CIT(A)-XLI, Mumbai. The first ground of appeal is as under: In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law and particularly having regard to diverse submissions on record, the ld. CIT(A) erred in not admitting claim of the appellant for grant of depreciation of Rs. 23,75,000/- w.r.t. cost of stock exchange card acquired, owned and used by the appellant as plant in the conduct of its business of sharebroking.2. The assessee is a member of the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and the simple question involved in this appeal is as to whether the assessee is entitled to depreciation allowance Under Section 32 of the IT Act on the cost of the BSE membership card acquired by the assessee. The claim of the assessee has been disallowed by the AO and the ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the AO's finding. The ld. CIT(A) has referred to the Supreme Court decision in the case of Sitalpur Sugar Works Ltd. v. CIT 49 ITR 160...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
1.1 The Appellants are job workers, manufacturing grease from the raw materials and packing materials supplied by M/s Tide Water Oil Co.India Ltd. They filed necessary price lists under Rule 173C of CER 1944, duly supported by independent Charted Accountants certificates showing the landed cost of raw materials and packing materials in their factory and the job charges, and paid excise duty on such cost +job charges basis.However, the department, in the proceedings before us seeks to levy excise duty on the selling price of M/s Tide Water Oil Co. India Ltd. ii) that the appellants are related persons of Tide Water within the meaning of Section 4(4)(d)(ii) of the Act; iii) that there is any flow back of financial consideration from Tide Water; i) suppression of fact as the appellants have "special relationship" with Tide Water Oil Co., and that they further suppressed the wholesale price at which the said Tide Water Oil Company sold the products. ii) the Appellants have deliberately, w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1984]55CompCas281(Bom)
1. The present Company Application No. 7 of 1982 arises out of summons for directions dated 14th January, 1982, for the following orders :'(a) The non-compliance of the order of this Hon'ble court dated 26th June, 1981, passed in Company Application No. 173 of 1981, be condoned. (b) That the order of this Hon'ble court dated 26th June, 1981, passed Company Application No. 173 of 1981 be vacated. (c) In the alternative to (b) above, the operation of the order dated 26th June, 1981, passed in Company Application No. 173 of 1981 be stayed until further orders of this Hon'ble court. (d) In the alternative to prayers (b) and (c) above, liberty be granted to the applicants to propound a fresh scheme of reconstruction under section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956, within three months or within such time as this Hon'ble court deems fit, of the finalisation of the proposal for reconstruction assistance made by the Industrial Reconstruction Corporation of India Ltd.'2. In support of this summons,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2007(2)ALLMR612; 2007(3)MhLj275
J.H. Bhatia, J.1. All petitions may be disposed of by common judgment. These petitions may be divided in three groups. In the Writ Petition Nos. 5526/95, 1388/96, 4341/96,7648/2000, 1579/2002, 2575/2003, 9160/2003, 9162/2003,9178/2003, 847/2006, 2025/2006, 3047/2006, 377/2001, 5584/2006, 6537/2006,OSWP Nos. 407/1992,3693/1991 and 452/2005 the petitioners claim to hold either the degree or diploma of Vaidya Visharad or Ayurved Ratna or some other equivalent degree awarded by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Prayag or Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Allahabad and some other institutions, whose degrees and diplomas are not recognised in Schedule II of the Indian Medical Central Council Act, 1970 (In short The Central Act). Most of them claim to have been registered with the State Council of Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh. These degrees and diplomas in Ayurveda conferred by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Prayag after 1967 and all the degrees and diplomas conferred by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Allahabad are no...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
N.M. Jamdar, J. 1. These petitions arise from the proceedings undertaken for validation of Caste Certificates. The two points that we have framed for our consideration are common in all these petitions and thus, these petitions are grouped together and are disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The two points that arise for consideration are: A) Whether the composition of the Scrutiny Committees constituted by the State of Maharashtra by Government Notification dated 30.07.2011 for verification of caste certificates, is in consonance with the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of MadhuriPatil (I), 1994 (6) SCC 241 and Madhuri Patil (II), 1997 (5) SCC 437 and what is the legal status of the validity certificates granted by these Committees. B) Whether it is mandatory for the Scrutiny Committees to call for a field inquiry report from the Vigilance Cell constituted under the provisions of the Act and Rules, before granting validity certificates to the candidates and what is the lega...
Tag this Judgment!