.....certiorari acts in exercise of a supervisory and not appellate jurisdiction. one consequence of this is that the court will not review findings of fact reached by the inferior court or tribunal, even if they be erroneous; 4. an error in the decision or determination itself may also be amenable to a writ of certiorari if it is a manifest error apparent on the face of the proceedings, e.g. when it is based on clear ignorance or disregard of the provisions of law. in other words, it is a patent error which can be corrected by certiorari but not mere wrong decision.xxx xxx xxx xxx12. in the exercise of certiorari jurisdiction, the high court proceeds on an assumption that a court which has jurisdiction over a subject-matter has the jurisdiction to decide wrongly as well as rightly. the high court would not, therefore, for the purpose of certiorari assign to itself the role of an appellate court and step into re-appreciating or evaluating the evidence and substitute its own findings in place of those arrived at by the inferior court.13. in nagendra nath bora v. commr. of hills division and appeals air 1955 sc 398, the parameters for the exercise of jurisdiction, calling upon the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....313,crpc.5. the learned sessions judge having closely appreciated the material evidence on record and on careful examination of the exhibits so relied upon by the prosecution by her the impugned judgment and order dated 30.3.2002 passed in case no. 76(t)/2001 found the appellant guilty of commission of offence of killing both the husband and daughter of pw 1 and convicted and sentenced him as already indicated above.6. such conviction and sentence have been challenged in this appeal by the appellant from jail.7. it is an admitted position mat there was no eye-witness and the entire prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence.8. p w11 the doctor who conducted the autopsy of the dead body of the deceased ghursai orang found the following injuries as revealed by him in his evidence:1. a lacerated injury over the right paritol regunrmeasuring 2 1 cm.2. a lacerated injury over the left occipital region measuring 3 1 cm.3. a depressed fracture involving right parital and frontal bones measuring 6 x 6 cm. 4. contusion of the scalp on the left side.9. the same doctor, pw 11 also found the following injuries on the dead body of srimati orang after having conducted the post.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2008CriLJ2420
.....kingaonkar, j.1. both these applications filed under section 482 of the cr.p.c. are being disposed of together. for, they arise out of same set of fact situation. the applicants seek quashing of f.i.r. dated 14.6.2004 and consequent proceedings initiated by respondent no. 4 at vazirabad police station, nanded, on the basis of which crime no. 128/2004 is registered against them for offence under sections 420, 463, 468 and 471 read with section 34 of the i.p.c.2. the respondent no. 4 (yeshwant) lodged f.i.r. against the applicants and t.i.l.r., namely, shri p.n. zalke, alleging that they prepared false and collusive record purporting to indicate ownership of cts no. 2671 with applicant bakshisingh. there is no dispute about the fact that complainant yeshwant is owner of property bearing cts no. 2675. the applicant bakshising owns land which originally bore s. no. 11. according to the complainant, land s. no. 11 was not divided at any point of time. he alleged that bakshising, in collusion with the t.i.l.r. and other two officials -amarsing kamthekar and mohd.nawazkhan, falsely manipulated entries in the city survey record to show that s. no. 11 was divided into two parts. they.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2008(4)ALLMR47; (2008)110BOMLR1469
.....results of all the candidates except 398 candidates who appeared for the main examination whose results were withheld based upon the mpsc's satisfaction of they having indulged in mass scale cheating by replacement of the answer sheets. as aforesaid, the mpsc proposed to take administrative action against those candidates. hence, on 1.7.2002, the mpsc issued its first show cause notice to each of those candidates. these were naturally on cyclostyled paper, calling upon them to show cause as to why administrative action should not be taken against them and they should not be debarred. on 9.7.2002, the candidates filed their reply. they required inspection and copies of certain documents. the mpsc issued a second notice on 9.8.2002, which was replied by the candidates on 14.8.2002, stating that they were not public servants within the meaning of section 2(c) of the prevention of corruption act, 1988 (pca) or section 21 of the indian penal code (ipc) and that, therefore, the mpsc could not blacklist them. they contended that because the notices were cyclostyled, they showed non-application of mind. 6. whilst the inquiry was in progress, those candidates were restrained from.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR2008Bom136; 2008(4)BomCR787; (2008)110BOMLR1524
.....instrument of his free will and grant of a probate or letters of administration does not confer title to property, clearly elucidates the fact that in a probate petition, there can never be any dispute relating to property but only a question relating to the validity of the will.16. lastly, after having perused through various previous judgments of this court and the hon'ble supreme court, various statutes, and having analyzed the intention of the government behind issuing the notifications dated 1/10/1994 and 23/03/2000, the learned single judge d.k.deshmukh,j. stated that as the question in relation to grant of exemption arises often before this hon'ble court and has often resulted in conflicting judgments, the matter ought to be placed before a lager bench of this hon'ble court so that a correct and authoritative view of the matter can be taken.17. the learned senior counsel for the petitioners, dr. tulzapurkar, has submitted that the petitioners are not liable to pay any court fees on the petition in view of the notification dated 1/10/1994 as amended by the notification dated 23/03/2000, as the petition has been filed for probate of a will dated 3/02/1999, wherein.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2008(5)ALLMR323; 2008(4)BomCR808; (2008)110BOMLR1717; 2009(1)MhLj227
.....sangamwadi. the acquisition in question has admittedly culminated in the declaration of award dated 28-6-2006. the petitioners, therefore, are in fact challenging the said award passed after following the gamut of process as contemplated under the land acquisition act, 1894 for short the said act. a perusal of the averments made in the petition discloses that the said award has been challenged, inter alia, on the ground that the provisions of section 5a of the said act have been breached inasmuch as the objections raised by the petitioners have not been considered and no personal hearing has been granted to the petitioners. the award is also questioned on the ground that it has not been declared within the time prescribed i.e. a period of two years of the declaration under section 6 of the land acquisition act.6. on behalf of the respondents, affidavits have been filed by the special land acquisition officer as well as the acquiring body i.e. the respondents no. 2 and 3 to the petition dealing with the claims and contentions raised in the petition. the affidavit of the respondents no. 2 and 3 also discloses the manner in which the persons who are affected by the project are.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2008)110BOMLR1842; 2008CriLJ3234
.....(1) month on the second count. 2. the appellant was working as an assistant police prosecutor in the courts at jalna. there is no dispute about the fact that he was working as public servant within the meaning of section 2(c) of the prevention of corruption act, 1988. complainant amrutlal bhurewal was involved as an accused in a criminal case (s.t.c. no. 2973/1990), which was pending in the court no. 4 of judicial magistrate (f.c.), jalna. the said criminal case was due for final hearing. it was fixed on board of 4th march, 1992.3. the prosecution case, stated briefly, is that the appellant was assigned work of the court of 4th judicial magistrate (f.c.), jalna at the relevant time. he was representing the prosecution in the said criminal case filed against amrutlal (complainant). on 4th march, 1992, complainant amrutlal attended the court of judicial magistrate as an accused. the date of hearing was adjourned to 17th march, 1992. the appellant met the complainant - amrutlal outside the court and took him to the canteen for having a cup of tea. the appellant, during course of conversation with the complainant, represented that he would manage the witnesses in the criminal case.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2008(5)BomCR149; (2008)110BOMLR1797
.....act, 1963 alleging forcible dispossession from the suit premises between 14.3.2008 and 17.3.2008 when the plaintiff was out of india.2. the relevant factual matrix, as disclosed from the material placed before this court and the submissions, that are advanced by the learned senior counsel for the parties , to the extent it is necessary for deciding this motion, is as under. defendant no. 1 and the plaintiff are husband and wife, who got married on 1.9.1987. till 1993, they resided with the parents of defendant no. 1. defendant no. 1 is a director of piem hotels limited (for short, 'piem'). during the period between 1993 and 1995, they were staying in hotel president. in 1995 the suit premises was purchased by piem as director's accommodation for defendant no. 1. according to the plaintiff, she and defendant no. 1 resided at the suit premises from 1996 onwards till she was dispossessed in march, 2008.2.1 on 1.4.2005, defendant no. 1 was appointed as the it advisor of defendant no. 2 - indian hotels co.ltd and it was then continued vide letter dated 7.3.2007. his appointment was thereafter confirmed by defendant no. 2 vide letter dated 24.8.2005. subsequently, piem granted licence.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2008(4)ALLMR108; 2008(5)BomCR163; (2008)110BOMLR1617; 2008(5)MhLj300
.....of maharashtra took place in the year 1960, and with the passage of time the problem of regional imbalance aggravated to a large extent. hence, a 'fact finding committee on regional imbalances' was formed under the chairmanship of dr. v.m dandekar to undertake a sectoral study of the backlog in areas like irrigation, technical education, health, roads etc.7. the committee found backlog of 38% in irrigation in thevidharbha region, a backlog of 22.85% in marathwada region and 39% in the rest of maharashtra area. the report of the dandekar committee was not accepted by the government of maharashtra but the government allocated special funds for removal of backlog as identified by the said committee.8. in the year 1984, a resolution was passed by both the houses of the state assembly requesting the president to use his powers under article 371(2) of the constitution of india. no action was taken over this resolution and the agitation for separate state of vidharbha was launched.9. after a period of 10 years, in 1994 the president of india made an order dated 9th march 1994 providing for special responsibility of the governor of maharashtra for the establishment of separate.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2008(3)ARBLR197(Bom); 2008(4)BomCR838; (2008)110BOMLR1691; 2008(4)MhLj926; LC2008(2)431
.....in the copyright of the film 'victoria no. 203' to any third party. 3. reliefs claimed under prayers (b) and (c) are declined as not pressed. 4. the facts giving rise to the controversy between the parties are that the petitioner is the producer and first owner of copyright in the film 'victoria no. 203'. by an agreement dated 26th july 2007, the petitioner assigned to the respondent along with him joint ownership in the ratio of 50:50 the rights in the negative of the film. there is some dispute between the parties as to whether copyright in the film or only in the negatives of the film are assigned. that would be decided by the arbitral tribunal. at this stage suffice it to refer to clause no. 8(d) of the agreement which provides that the respondents shall be entitled to enter into an agreement in respect of the his rights (under the agreement) by making the petitioner the confirming party to the agreement. the agreement provides that all disputes and differences arising between the parties in connection with the agreement shall be resolved by mutual consent failing which the disputes shall be referred to the arbitration. 5. disputes having arisen between the parties and.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT