Mumbai Aurangabad Court September 2011 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Smt. Suraksha W/O Premsingh Vs. Neeta D/O Padamsing Taji and ors.
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Sep-30-2011
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the present matter is taken up for final hearing and disposal at the stage of admission itself. 2. This Misc. Civil Application is filed praying for transfer of proceeding bearing MACP No. 317 of 2009, pending on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Amravati, to the Court of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalgaon. 3. It is case of the applicant that, she is legally wedded wife of Premsing @ Dilipsingh Rajput, who died on 21st June, 2009, in road accident of Niwasa-Mozari road. The marriage of the applicant with deceased Presmsing was solemnized on 10th May, 1996 at Akola and the applicant is now issueless widow. It is case of the applicant that, during life time of Premsing, the applicant and the deceased Premsing moved an Hindu Marriage Petition U/section 13(1)(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, on 22nd June, 2008, which was disposed of, as the same could not be materialized ...
Prakash Bankatlal Ostawal Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Sep-30-2011
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. These petitions are directed against the orders dated 30.03.2011 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Majalgaon in Criminal Revision Application Nos.11/2010 and 12/2010 thereby confirming the orders dated 30.03.2010 passed below Exhibit-66 in SCC No.235/2007 and below Exhibit-74 in SCC No.234/2007, by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Majalgaon. The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, by the impugned orders, had discharged respondent No.2 from the said Summary Criminal Cases. 3. As common question of law is involved in both these petitions, they are being disposed of by the common judgment. 4. For better appreciation of the facts which gave rise to file the present petitions, it would be appropriate to advert to the facts of the case in nut shell, which are as follows: On the request of respondents No.2 to 4, who are the controlling authorities of Jai Mahesh Sugar Factory, the petition...
Gorakh S/O Bhagwan @ Ganpati Vs. the Sub-divisional Officer and ors.
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Sep-29-2011
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the present matter is taken up for final hearing and disposal at the stage of admission itself. 2. This Writ Petition is filed challenging the judgment and order dated 01.11.2010, passed by the learned Member, Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Aurangabad, in Revision Petition NO. 6/B/2010/AN. 3. The particulars and events which are disclosed by the petitioner in this petition are as under. . The agricultural land bearing Gut No. 680(Old Survey No. 296) admeasuring 4H.23 R situated at village Telangshi, Tq. Jamkhed, District Ahmendagar, was initially owned and possessed by one Maruti Babu Jaybhaye. Maruti Babu Jaybhaye died on 13.7.1955 and the name of his legal heir, namely, Bhagwan @ Ganpati S/o Maruti Jaybhaye was recorded in the 7/12 extract vide mutation entry No.2300. . It is further contended that the said Bhagwan @ Ganpati is the father of petitioner and he was in actual possession ...
Vishnu So Eknath Patil and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Sep-29-2011
Top of Form 1 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2 Present criminal revision application is directed against the order dated 8-6-2007 below exh. 17 in Sessions Case no. 53/2006 passed by the Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge - 2, Osmanabad. 3 Such of the facts as are necessary for adjudication of this criminal revision application can be summarised as under : . Respondent no. 2 herein lodged report on 4-6-2005 in Shiradhon police station, Tq. Kallamb, Dist. Osmanabad alleging that in the afternoon of 4-6-2005 at about 3.30 pm one Gopinath Dnyanoba Patil and Dharma Vitthal Pande assaulted his son with fists and kick blows. On the basis of this report, non-cognizable offence was recorded vide entry no. 16/2005 for offences punishable under section 323, 504, 506 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It further appears that again on 8-6-2005 one more report was filed by respondent no. 2 in the same police station alleging the incident date...
Abedali Khan S/O Rahematali Khan Vs. Devidas S/O Dhonduji Poghe
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Sep-28-2011
1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. By this writ petition, petitioner takes an exception to the order dated 2nd May 2011 passed by 5th Civil Judge, Junior Division, Hingoli wherein the objection raised by the petitioner/judgment debtor in Execution Proceedings No.3 of 2011 was rejected. 3. Petitioner has filed a Civil Suit bearing No.96/2010 on 6.8.2010 for injunction in which it is prayed that the respondent/defendant be restrained from evicting the petitioner, without due process of law. It is the case of the petitioner that in the month of February 2000, respondent let out his house No.7 for rent of Rs.500/- per month and since then he is residing there as a tenant by paying amount of Rs.500/- from time to time without any arrears. Respondent in 2010, started disturbing the possession of the petitioner and directed him to vacate the premises. Respondent had entered the house and asked him to va...
Kranti Junior Adhyapak and anr. Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Sep-28-2011
1. Heard learned Counsel for petitioners. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties. Learned Counsel for respective respondents waive service of Rule. 2. This writ petition is filed challenging the judgment and order dated 20.06.2009, passed by the Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Aurangabad, in Appeal No.15/2007. Petitioners herein are Respondents No.1 & 2 in the said appeal and Respondent No.3 herein is the original appellant. The said appeal was filed by Respondent No.3 herein challenging the order of termination dated 15.06.2007. The copy of the appeal memo and also grounds taken in the appeal are placed on record at Exhibit-A on pages 17 to 69 of the compilation of this Writ Petition. Therefore, the facts leading to filing of such appeal are not repeated herein since those are extensively stated by the appellant in the appeal memo. It appears that after recording the evidence, considering pleadings of the parties...
Bhausaheb S/O Hiraman Mokale and ors. Vs. Laxman Shankar Gaikwad
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Sep-27-2011
1. This Civil Application is filed for condonation of delay, in filing the Appeal From Order against the judgment and decree, passed by the learned District Judge-9, Aurangabad in R.C.S.No. 241 of 2005. 2. It is stated in the application that, after passing of the judgment and decree by the lower appellate Court, the advocate for the applicants- appellants was under impression that he has filed an application for certified copies of the Judgment and decree, and the copies are awaited. However, after arrival of the applicant No.3 for collecting the certified copies, the Advocate went to the copying section for collecting the copies, it was revealed that the application was not at all filed. It is further contended that, thereafter, immediately the applicants filed the copy application for obtaining the certified copies, and got immediately certified copies of the impugned judgment and decree. After obtaining the certified copies of the Judgment and decree, the same was handed over to th...
Syed Naim S/O Syed Vajir Vs. Samina Syed Naim and ors.
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Sep-27-2011
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent. 2. This petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the judgment dated 30.05.2011 passed by Sessions Judge, Beed in Criminal Revision No.92/2010 by which the learned Sessions Judge has confirmed the order dated 29.10.2010 passed below Exhibit-22 in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.586/2008. 3. Such of the facts, as are necessary for the decision of this petition, may briefly be stated thus- Respondent No.1 has filed an application under the Domestic Violence Act before JMFC, Beed bearing Miscellaneous Criminal Application No.205/2008. A separate application, seeking interim maintenance and certain other directions was filed on 18.06.2008. Application for interim maintenance was contested by the petitioner-husband, however the same came to be allowed on 21.08.2008. It is observed by the trial court that the petitioner to pay financial assistance @ Rs.5000/- u/s 20 of the Domestic Vi...
Mr. Dattaprasad Ramvilas Lakhotia and anr. Vs. the State of Maharashtr ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Sep-27-2011
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, and heard finally, by consent. 2. This Application is for quashing complaint dated 17.7.2010 i.e. Crime No. I-277/2010 registered with Kranti Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad, for offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The copy of complaint is at page 16. 3. Learned Advocate for the petitioner has argued in support of the application. The points pressed by him, are summarized as follows:- (i) The dispute/subject-matter of the contract is of purely civil nature. (ii) There is no element of cheating in the initial stage of the promise or representation. (iii) When a party fails to perform promise on his/her part, other side elects to treat it as a breach of promise, in no case, treating it to be a case of breach, amounts to cheating. (iv) Even upon accepting every word and sentence contained in the complaint to be true, still no offence is made out. 4. The learned Advocate for respondent No.2-complainant has...
Smt. Rekha Vinod Shivpuje and anr. Vs. the State of Maharashtra and or ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Sep-27-2011
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned counsel for the parties. 2. By the present petition, the petitioners are seeking quashment of the order dated 17th October, 2007, issued by Respondent No. 3 - the Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Latur whereby the family pension granted to the petitioners upon death of late Shri Vinod Veerbhadra Shivpuje was discontinued. 3. Deceased Vinod was the husband and father respectively of the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2. The deceased was working as an Assistant Teacher at a Primary School at Sawargaon Ajani. He committed suicide on 27th January, 2006. The petitioners obtained succession certificate and claimed family pension from Respondent No. 3. Ultimately, on 29th December, 2006, provisional family pension was ordered and since 5th February, 2007, the actual payment was started. In the meantime, the father of deceased Vinod raised an objection that since a criminal case is pending against Petitioner No....
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »