Advanced Search Results
Raosaheb S/O Babasaheb Kakade Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others
Mumbai
Sep-21-1998
Civil
Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958 - Sections 39; Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samities Act, 1961 - Sections 111(13) and 119(1)
1999(3)ALLMR194; 1999(3)BomCR25; 1999(2)MhLj367
N.L. Jadhav, Adv.
ORDERN.P. Chapalgaonker, J. 1. Heard. 2. Rule. Taken up forthwith for hearing by consent. 3. An action was initiated to remove the respondent No, 3 Sahebrao Bajirao Amte, Sarpanch of the Village Panchayat Bedarwadi, Tq. Patoda,...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskSow. Girika Wo Badamrao Pandit and ors. Vs. Dist. Beed. the State of M ...
Mumbai
Dec-20-2011
Election
Maharashtra Municipal Council and Nagar Panchayat Act - Section 16 (1) (K),; Maharashtra Municipal Corporations and Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships ( second Amendment ) Act, 1995 ; Maharashtra Local Authority Members Disqualification Act, 1986 - Section 55 B
1. The petitioner and respondent nos. 3 to 5 filled in nominations for the election of Councillor of Gevrai Municipal Council from Ward No. 2-B. 2. The objection was taken to the nomination of respondent no....
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskDevrao S/O Kisan Lad and ors. Vs. the District Collector and ors.
Mumbai Aurangabad
Oct-14-2011
Evidence
Indian Evidence Act - Section 73; Commission of Enquiry Act, 1952 ; Commission of Enquiry Act
Mr. V.J. Dixit And Ors.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally, by consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 2. All the petitioners are challenging the directions of the respondent no.1-State of Maharashtra issued vide Government resolution dated...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask18-section briefs on any result in this list
Vinod S/O Gopichand Rathod Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Urban Develop ...
Mumbai Aurangabad
Feb-05-2013
Education
R.M. Borde, J. 1 Heard Mr.N.L.Jadhav, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1 to 3, Mr.S.S.Rathi, learned Counsel for Respondent No.4 and Mr.S.T.Veer, learned Counsel for Respondent Nos.5 and 7 to 12. None...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskPrabhakar Vs. State of Maharashtra
Mumbai
Jul-18-2008
Family
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 294, 313 and 374; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 302 and 506
II(2008)DMC493
N.L. Jadhav, Adv.
N.V. Dabholkar, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by which the original accused challenges the judgment and order dated 15th January, 2007 rendered by the Additional Sessions...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskMarathwada Association for Social Services Vs. State of Maharashtra an ...
Mumbai
Mar-11-2005
Constitution
Bombay Public Trust Act; Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 - Sections 82, 82(1), 82(3), 82(4), 82(5) and 83; National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993 - Sections 5(1), 14, 14(1), 15(1) and 32; National Council for Teachers Education (Form of application for recognition, the lime of submission of application, determination of norms and standards for recognition of teachers education from time to time and permission to start new course or training) Regulation, 2002; Constitution of India - Article 226
2005(5)BomCR784; 2005(3)MhLj308
P.M. Shah and ;N.L. Jadhav, Advs. in W.P. No. 7676 of 2004 and ;V.G. Gangapurwala, Adv. holding for ;J.R. Patil, Adv. in W.P. No. 7677 of 2004
M.G. Gaikwad, J.1. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties, petitions are heard and decided finally.2. These two petitions have been decided by this common judgment as in both petitions point involved and relief claimed...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskGulabbai W/O Gopaldas Gujrati Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through the Sec ...
Mumbai
Jul-09-2008
Civil
Consitution of India - Article 141
2008(6)BomCR184; 2008(6)MhLj679
N.L. Jadhav, Adv.
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule, heard forthwith.2. The petitioner is the widow of Gopaldas Kanhyalal Gujrati. The late Gopaldas Kanhyalal Gujrati had participated in the Indian Independence Movement and was sentenced for six months by Dharangaon Magistrate...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskSangmeshwar Sugar Limited Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors.
Mumbai Aurangabad
Dec-14-2011
Constitution
Constitution of India - Article 226; Companies Act,1956
Mr. N.L. Jadhav, Adv.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard for final disposal by consent of parties. 2. The writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to challenge the orders made by Sugar Commissioner in...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskMirza Kadir Baig Rasul Baig Vs. District Collector and ors.
Mumbai
Dec-19-2002
Service
Maharashtra Local Authority Members Disqualification Act, 1986 - Sections 7; Maharashtra Local Authority Members Disqualification Rules, 1987 - Rules 3(1) and 6
2003(4)BomCR672
V.J. Dixit, Adv.
A.B. Naik, J.1. By this writ petition the petitioner challenges the order passed by the Collector, Parbhani, in File No. 2000-MVN-1-P-CR-5, dated 10-9-2002. In order to appreciate the points involved in this petition, following undisputed facts...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›