Mumbai Aurangabad Court April 2013 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.
Adnan Abu Athar Bakshi and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Apr-25-2013
NareshH. Patil, J. Heard finally, by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties. 2. The Application is moved for final disposal by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, as the parties have settled the dispute amicably. Consent Terms are filed on record. Both the parties are before the Court and are identified by their respective counsel. Consent Terms and Verification made by the parties, namely, Adnan Abu Athar Bakshi (Applicant No.1) and Mir Irshad Ali Mir Mahammad Ali (Respondent No.2), is taken on record and marked as "X" for identification. 3. It is contended by the Applicants that Applicant No.3 is a Managing Director of a Tours and Travels Company, namely, "Sky Ship International Pvt. Ltd."(For short "said company"). An agreement was executed between every Hajji and the said Company wherein the terms and conditions were incorporated to avoid any complications to Hajjis during their Hajj tour. It is submitted by the Applicants that for the year 2...
Rohit and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Apr-25-2013
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. 2. The petitioners/ landlords of the premises, have sought quashing of proceedings pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Aurangabad being S.C.C. No.9242/2007, initiated by the respondent No.2 for failure to get lease deed agreement registered. 3. The respondent No.2 has taken godown from the petitioners on 1.6.2001 on monthly rent of Rs.1000/-. As per Section 55 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the "said Act" for short), a duty is cast on the landlord to get the tenancy document duly registered which is mandatory. According to respondent, in spite of his request and demand to the petitioners to get executed and registered the agreement of tenancy, the petitioners avoided the tenancy and hence, committed an offence under Section 55 of the said Act. The petitioners question validity, legality of the said process. 4. Mr. Deshmukh, learned counsel for the p...
Dinesh Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2013
Oral Judgment: Rule was issued on October 18, 2011 and protection was granted to the petitioner. 2. The petitioner was appointed as District Social Welfare Officer in the year 1992. He was promoted as Divisional Social Welfare Officer and consequently, was nominated as a member of Divisional Caste Certificate Verification Committee No.2, Latur, effective from 2009 and remained as such, till 2012. 3. There was controversy in respect of caste claim of one Farah Mubin Mohammed Jafar Ali Khan, asserted to be belonging to "Chhapparbandh", N.T. Category. The petitioner did not approve caste claim of said Farah. Mohd. Jaffar Ali Khan, father of said Farah, felt estranged with the conduct of the petitioner. He even misbehaved with the members of the committee, resultantly, police were called in the office and communicated about the misbehavior of Mohd. Jaffar. Petitioner had negated caste claim relating to daughter of Mohd. Jaffar. 4. Respondent no.3 is an employee in the said Office, however,...
Shrirang Nagorao Chavan and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Apr-17-2013
A.V. Nirgude, J. All the three appeals arose from the judgment and order passed by learned Special Judge, Parbhani, in Special Case No.30 of 1999 dated 31.12.1999. For the sake of convenience the parties to the appeals shall be referred to according to their original designation, namely, accused Nos.1 to 18 and the State of Maharashtra/prosecution. 2. Accused Nos.1 to 18 faced trial for the offences punishable under section 147, 148 and 302 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. In the alternative, the prosecution also charged them for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. In additional to this, they were charged for committing offence of conspiracy punishable under section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and for offence punishable under section 25 of the Arms Act and lastly for the offence punishable under section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. In addition to this, the accused were also charged for the offence punishable under s...
Western Maharashtra Development Corporation and Others Vs. State of Ma ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Apr-16-2013
Rule was issued on 6th February, 2007. Heard Mr.Godsay and Party-in-person, who argued in Marathi. 2. A distillery was started at Chitali in Rahata Ahmednagar district by the Government of Maharashtra. It was transferred to the petitioner -Western Maharashtra Development Corporation (for short, the Corporation). For the purposes of such industrial unit, the distillery, properties of agriculturists were acquired. However, the left over properties in the near by area were adversely affected due to non-treatment of spent water/molasses. This resulted into percolation in the wells and fertility of the soil was adversely affected. The farmers in the area staged agitation. The Government, at that time, realized a piquant condition. Consequently, fresh water used to be supplied to Chitali village. However, it did not resolve the damage to the agricultural fields, yield and to the well water. 3. Respondent No.2 and others filed Writ Petition No.2533/1989 in this Court, asserting privilege incl...
Anandsagar Bahuddeshiya Social Krida Mandal (Sanstha) Vs. the State of ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the parties. 2. This writ petition takes exception to the order dated 3/6-09-2012 passed by respondent No. 1 dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner and the order dated 29-02-2012 passed by respondent Nos. 3 and 4 thereby refusing to grant licence to start and run the Social Club/Card Room in favour of the petitioner. 3. The facts leading to file this writ petition, as disclosed in the writ petition, are as under:- The petitioner is registered under the provisions of Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 with the aim and object to open Social Club for amusement of its members. The petitioner herein, is the original appellant in appeal filed before respondent Nos. 1 and 2. The said appeal was filed challenging the order dated 29-02-2012 passed by respondent Nos. 3 and 4. Respondent No.1 herein, is the Principal Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai, respondent No. 2 is the Minister for Department of Home, Ma...
Sunil S/O Khanderao Gaikwad and Another Vs. the State of Maharashtra a ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
A.V. Nirgude, J. 1 Both these appeals arise from the judgment and order dated 1st September, 1999 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Osmanabad in Sessions Case No.41 of 1999. 2 The parties to the appeals would be referred to as their original designation before the trial Court. The sessions case was filed against two accused. They were charged under Section 302 and 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Judge of the trial Court vide impugned judgment held that Accused No.1 was guilty of offence punishable under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to Rigorous Imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- with a default clause. The learned Sessions Judge found Accused No.2 guilty under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer one year Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- with default clause. The learned Sessions Judge acquitted both the accused for the offence punishabl...
Ramesh S/O Raghunath Komatwar Vs. Jubedabegum Abdul Kadar Kazi
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with consent of the parties. 2. This writ petition takes exception to the order dated 06.03.2013, passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Beed, in Misc. Civil Application No. 255 of 2011. 3. The learned counsel appearing for petitioners submits that defendant filed application for transfer of the Suit bearing Regular Civil Suit No. 28 of 2011 from the Court of Civil Judge Junior Division, Dharur to the Courts of Civil Judge Junior Division, Majalgaon and or Civil Judge Senior Division, Majalgaon. 4. The learned counsel appearing for petitioners submits that there was no affidavit, supporting the allegations made in the application filed by the original defendant. He invited my attention to the judgment of Madhyapradesh High Court in the case of SudarshanJain Vs. Deep Chand Jain and others reported in AIR 2006 MadhyaPradesh 6 and submitted that the application for transfer of the case on mere allegations of...
Ankush Namdeo Thore and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Anothe ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Apr-10-2013
NareshH. Patil, J. 1. The Appellants are life convicts. The charge was framed against six accused persons. During the pendency of the Appeal, original Appellant No.1/accused No.1 - Namdeo Kerba Thore died, therefore the Appeal abated against him. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that deceased Mahadeo Sitaram Thore and the Appellants who are related inter-se, were residing in the village Deo-Nandra, Tq-Pathri, Dist-Parbhani. They own agricultural lands adjacent to each others. There was boundary dispute between deceased Mahadeo and the accused persons due to that they use to quarrel. Prior to the incident in question, a complaint was lodged by the deceased Mahadeo against the accused persons in Pathri Police Station for an offence punishable under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. The Police had filed chargesheet against the Appellants/accused, under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. On 10th October 1993, deceased Mahadeo Sitaram Thore accompanied by his mother Dhrupatabai...
M/S. Sanjay B. Jawlekar Vs. General Manager, South Central Railway Sec ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
1. This arbitration application is filed with a prayer to appoint Arbitral Tribunal to adjudicate upon the disputes interse the parties to the arbitration application. 2. The case of the applicant, in nutshell, is as follows:- It is the case of the applicant that the applicant is registered Government Contractor. In pursuance to the notice inviting tender by the respondents, the applicant being successful tenderer and complied with the eligibility criteria in all respects, was allotted to the work of Nanded Extension of PIT Line From 21 to 24 coaches and additional PIT line for 16 coaches length and provision of sick line facility agreement No. 5/Sr.Den/Co-Ord/Ned dated 9.5.2007. The said allotment of the work was in pursuance to the offer submitted by the applicant. It is further case of the applicant that details in nutshell of the afore mentioned work are as follows;- a. Date of Agreement : 09/07/2007. b. Agreement No. 5/Sr.DEN/Co-Ord/NED dated 09/05/07. c. Date of completion withou...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »