Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Defendent: h a solkar · Page 1 of about 21 results (0.028 seconds)

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

Jul 01 1986

Rameshchandra Jamnadas and Co. Vs. Terene Traders and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-01-1986

Subject : PropertyCivil

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2

Reported in : 1986(3)BomCR406; (1986)88BOMLR427

Advocate for Respondent : H.A. Solkar, Adv. for ;Bharat Zaveri, Adv. for respondent No. 1 and ;P.A. Jani, Adv., i/b., Gagrat and Co. for respondent No. 2

V.V. Vaze, J.1. History's most grand lose accomplishments can have the most banal of origins. Sagacity and foresight of many a captains is industry combined to put Bombay on the map of India as its industrial...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Dec 24 1998

The State of Maharashtra Vs. Lalit S. Nagpal and Others

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Dec-24-1998

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Essential Commodities Act, 1955 - Sections 3, 6-A, 6-E and 12-AC; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 167, 397 and 452; Petrolling Products Distributation Order, 1972

Reported in : 1999(5)BomCR487; 1999(1)MhLj915

Advocate for Respondent : H.A. Solkar and ;R.A. Shaikh, Advs.

ORDERD. G. Deshpande, J.1. All these applications are filed by the State and they involve a common question of law. I have heard the learned A.P.P. for the State of Maharashtra and Mr. H.A. Solkar for...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 10 1980

State of Maharashtra Vs. Suresh Dattatraya Varnekar

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-10-1980

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Customs Act - Sections 135; Gold Control Act, 1968 - Sections 85

Reported in : 1981CriLJ1717

1. This is an appeal by the State for enhancement of the sentence. The accused was charged under Section 135(b)(ii) of the Customs Act and Section 85(ii), (iii) and (ix) of the Gold Control Act, 1968....

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Aug 04 1994

Babu Hamidkhan Mestry Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-04-1994

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 142, 147 and 149; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 161

Reported in : 1995(1)BomCR339; (1994)96BOMLR312; 1995CriLJ2356; 1995(1)MhLj843

Advocate for Respondent : Mrs. K.D. Randive, Addl. Public Prosecutor

1. The appellant aggrieved by the order dated 27-2-1986, passed by the Special Judge (Riots) Thane in Special Criminal Criminal Case No. 51 of 1984, convicting him under Sections 147, read with Sections 149 I.P.C., 148...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 19 1983

Retd. Lt. Col. Bhimrao Raghunath Karandikar Vs. Advocate Madhukar Yesh ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-19-1983

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 227; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 482; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 34, 120B, 193, 200, 201 and 219; Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Sections 2 and 18

Reported in : 1983(2)BomCR558

Advocate for Respondent : A.M. Joshi, Adv. for Respondent No. 1, ;P.P. Hudilikar, P.P., for respondent No. 2-State of Maharashtra, ;Rustam M. Bhagalia, Adv. respondent No. 3-in-person, ;V.V. Kamat and ;S.S. Deshmukh, Advs. for

H.H. Kantharia, J.1. The petitioner, retired Lt. Col. Bhimrao Raghunath Karandikar, a resident of Pune, filed the present petition under section 482, of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and under Article 227 of the Constitution of India...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 09 1983

The State of Maharashtra Vs. Chandrakant Tripathi and Others

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-09-1983

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Contempt of Courts Act - Sections 2

Reported in : (1983)85BOMLR562

Gadgil, J.1. This is a suo motu proceeding initiated by the Court against the three respondents under the Contempt of Courts Act. Respondent No. 1-Chandrakant Tripathi - is a Minister of State for Urban Development of...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 09 1983

The State of Maharashtra Vs. Chandrakant Tripathi and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-09-1983

Subject : Criminal

Reported in : 1983CriLJ1841

B.C. Gadgil, J. 1. This is a suo motu proceeding initiated by the Court against the three respondents under the Contempt of Courts Act. Respondent No. 1 Chandrakant. Tripathi is a Minister of State for Urban...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 24 1993

Sahebrao Shankarrao Mistry Vs. Smt. Azizabai HusseIn Ahmed Mulla Since ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-24-1993

Subject : Tenancy

Acts : Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 - Sections 13(1); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 41, Rule 31

Reported in : 1994(1)BomCR513

Advocate for Respondent : H.A. Solkar, Adv.

M.F. Saldanha, J.1. The petitioner in this case was the original tenant in respect of an open piece of land admeasuring 45' x 36' x 60', situated at Old Agra Road, Thane. He had by a...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 13 1979

Pandharinath Sakharam Chavan Vs. Bhagwan Ramu Kate and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-13-1979

Subject : Tenancy

Acts : Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Sections 14, 29, 29(1), 29(2), 32, 32(1), 32(1A), 32(1B), 32(1D), 32-A, 32-B, 32-C, 32-D, 32-E, 32-F, 32-G, 32-H, 32-I, 32-J, 32-K, 32-L, 32-M, 32-N, 32-O, 32-P, 32-Q, 32-R and 40; Limitation Act, 1963 - Sections 27; Limitation Act, 1908 - Sections 28; North-Western Provinces Rent Act, 1881 - Sections 95 and 96

Reported in : AIR1980Bom203; (1980)82BOMLR341; 1979MhLJ337

Advocate for Respondent : D.M. Rane,;N.D. Bhatkal and;M.H. Solkar, Advs. for;H.A. Solkar, Adv.

Naik, J.1. This writ petition raises an interesting question as to whether the heirs of a deceased tenant are entitled to the benefit of Sub-section (1B) of Section 32 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Apr 18 1991

Jaswantlal Chhotalal Doshi Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-18-1991

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 3, 9 and 27

Reported in : 1991(3)BomCR647

Advocate for Respondent : H.A. Solkar, A.P.P.

S.S. Dani, J.1. The appellant-accused Jaswantlal Chotalal Doshi, challenges the order of conviction and sentence dated 26th October 1989 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, is Sessions No. 502 of 1988, holding the appellant-accused guilty...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial