Mumbai Aurangabad Court June 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.
Ashwini Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-26-2013
Oral Judgment: (R.M. Borde, J.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties. 2. Petitioners, who are real sisters inter se, are challenging the respective orders passed by Sub Divisional Officer rejecting the applications tendered by them for issuance of caste certificate and the orders passed by the Respondent No.2 Committee, in appeals, confirming the orders passed by the Sub Divisional Officer. 3. The petitioners belong to 'Thakur', a Scheduled Tribe. The petitioners, in order to substantiate their claim, have placed reliance on the caste certificate issued by the Executive Magistrate, Aurangabad, on 08.07.1982, in favour of their father - Janardhan Trimbakrao certifying that he belongs to 'Thakur', Scheduled Tribe. The petitioners have also placed reliance on their respective school admission record wherein in the column of caste, entry is recorded as 'Thakur'. The petitioners have also placed reliance on the report fo...
Ritesh Ratilal JaIn and Others Vs. Sandhya and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-26-2013
Oral Order: The first proceeding is filed for quashing and setting aside the proceeding of Criminal Misc.Application No.176/2011 which is pending in the Court of JMFC, Bhusawal, Dist.Jalgaon. The said proceeding is filed for some reliefs under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, by respondent no.1. 2. The second proceeding is filed for the relief of quashing and setting aside the proceeding of R.C.C.No.107/11 which is pending before JMFC, Bhusawal and which is filed by police for offence punishable u/s 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r.w. 34 of IPC. After investigation of the crime u/s 156(3) of Cr.P.C. on private complaint filed by respondent no.1, charge sheet is filed by police. Both sides are heard. 3. In respect of first proceeding, it was submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that as per the record, respondent no.1 was living separate from her husband for more than 4 years and so, learned JMFC ought not to have entertained the proceeding. He placed reliance on so...
Satish S/O. Dhanmal Sanghavi Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-25-2013
1. The proceeding is filed for challenging common order made by Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jalgaon in M.C.A. Nos. 686/2010 and 694/2010 and also to challenge the common judgment delivered by Jalgaon Sessions Court in Criminal Revision Nos. 51/2011 and 55/2011. The revisions were filed against the aforesaid common order made by J.M.F.C. Both the sides are heard. 2. The petitioner had taken loan from a Credit Society for purchasing Volvo bus No. MH-19/Y-4444. It is his case that he had repaid the entire loan amount, but the Credit Society had taken the custody of bus from him prior to that and Credit Society refused to give custody of vehicle to him. It is his case that he then gave report to police against Chairman and Directors of the Society and on the basis of report, the crime came to be registered for offences punishable under sections 406, 420 etc. of Indian Penal Code. The said vehicle came to be attached in the crime and the petitioner filed M.C.A. No. 686 of 2010 for int...
Vinod S/O Khimji Lodaya Vs. Muljibhai S/O Maujibhai Patel and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-25-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, taken up for final hearing. 2. The present Civil Revision Application takes exception to the Order dated 03/10/2011 passed by the Presiding Officer, Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad, thereby rejecting the application below Exh. 80 filed by the applicant. 3. It is the case of the applicant that the land bearing City Survey Nos. 12889, 12889/1 and 12889/2 i.e. old Survey No. 38 situated out side Jafar Gate, Mondha Road, Aurangabad is the subject matter of the proceedings before the Maharashtra State Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad in Wakf Case No. 11 of 2005 and the Wakf Case No. 22 of 2005 pending before the Presiding Officer, Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad. The Wakf Case No. 22 of 2005 is already decided, however Wakf Case No. 11 of 2005 is yet pending before the Maharashtra State Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad. 4. It is the further case of the applicant that the respondent No. 17 has i...
Adityadeep Flat Owners Association and Another Vs. State of Maharashtr ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-24-2013
Oral Judgment: (R.M. Borde, J.) Heard. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, petition is taken up for final disposal at admission stage. 3. Petitioners who are residents of Adityadeep Complex, N-6, Sai Nagar, Aurangabad, are praying for issuance of directions to respondents restraining them from constructing public toilet and latrine on the open space adjacent to the shopping complex. According to petitioners, Development Control Rules framed by Aurangabad imposes prohibition for construction of latrines in the open space. Rule 13.3.1.3 of the Rules reads thus : "13.3.1.3. The structures to be permitted in the open spaces shall be as per the following provisions; i) They shall be single storyed structure with the maximum area not exceeding 10% of the open space. This shall be further subject to a maximum of 200 sq. m. ii) The structure shall be used for the purpose of pavilion or gymnasia or other activities which are related to open spaces; and iii)...
Dhondiba Namdeorao Bhosale Vs. Syed Ismail Syed Asadulla (Died Through ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-24-2013
1) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 12.8.1987 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 13/1982 decided by 2nd Additional District Judge, Latur, by which, the lower appellate court reversed the judgment and decree of the trial court. 2) In support of the appeal, Mr. S.S.Bora, learned Counsel for the appellant, submitted that the Second Appeal is being pressed only in so far as the part of the appellate decree in Para No.28 of the judgment, setting aside the decree of the trial court in respect of costs of improvement. Mr. Bora further submitted that no other points are being raised by him in this appeal except the above. 3) According to Mr.Bora, the lower Appellate Court placed reliance on Section 51 of The Transfer of Property Act,1882 to come to the conclusion that the Civil Court cannot decide the issue about costs of improvement and the issue be always left to be decided by the Executing Court when the execution proceedings are filed. The only reason, given by the low...
Prakash Vs. Nagema Begum and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-19-2013
Oral Judgment: The petitioner has questioned impugned order dated 5.3.2005 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ahmedpur below Exh.23 in R.T.C. No.1027/2004. 2. It is grievance of the petitioner (original accused) that he was serving as Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Latur and being a Government servant in the service of Government of Maharashtra and being a public servant, acting in discharge of his duties of his office, he was entitled for protection under Section 197(1) of Cr.P.C. in respect of prosecution under Section 13 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as "M.E.P.S. Act"). He is facing accusation on the ground that he had disobeyed the orders of School Tribunal and, therefore, proceeded against for alleged offence punishable under Section 13 of the M.E.P.S Act. It appears that in order to challenge the impugned order, an efficacious and alternate remedy under Section 397 of Cr.P...
Mahendrakumar Kanhyalal JaIn Vs. Mahavir Urban Co-operative Credit Soc ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-19-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard submissions at the Bar. 2. A question of law, which is sought to be raised in this petition is as to whether summons can be issued against the accused calling upon him to produce documents in his custody or possession in the criminal trial, wherein complainant wants to rebut defence of the accused. 3. It appears that in the pending Summary Criminal Case No. 3061/2003, in a trial arising out of complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant Shri Mahavir Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., Jalgaon through its authorised Recovery Officer had lodged complaint on the ground that the accused (present petitioner) had obtained loan from the complainant-company. The cheque in question bearing No. 841812 drawn upon United Western Bank Ltd., Jalgaon on 9.4.2003 for sum of Rs.72,16,911/- was presented by the complainant in Akola Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd., Akola, branch Jalgaon on 10.4.2003 for encashment. The cheque was returned dishonour...
Mohammed Zakir Mohammed Ghouse Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-19-2013
Oral Judgment: Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With consent of parties, matter is heard for final disposal. 2. The proceeding is filed to challenge the orders made by S.D.M. Degloor and the State Government in externment proceeding. The externment proceeding was started on the basis of report given by Degloor police station. It was informed by police that atleast 5 crimes were registered against the petitioner for offences committed under IPC and Bombay Police Act and he had created terror in society. Police had proposed to keep the petitioner out of 3 districts like Nanded, Latur and Parbhani. Such notice was given under Section 56 of Bombay Police Act to the petitioner. Petitioner gave reply to the notice and denied the allegations. He contended that in C.R.No.25/2000 mentioned in the show cause notice, he was acquitted in the year 2002 itself. He informed that he was acquitted in other crime like Crime No.131/01, 11/08 and 56/10. Police had filed copies of FIR alongwith rep...
Maulik Kotak and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jun-19-2013
Common Judgment: 1. Heard submissions at the Bar. The petitioners in all these petitions pray for quashing and setting aside the orders passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, J.M.F.C courts at Nanded, Newasa, Sangamner, Kopargaon as also Chalisgaon thereby issuing process in respective Summary Criminal Cases and also pray for setting aside the complaints filed by respondents-complainants. (mentioned details of number of cases and the details as to the courts and orders impugned )Criminal Writ Petition No.Name of Court whose order is impugnedCriminal Case No.Offences U/s.64/2003Order dated 19-11-2002 by CJM, Nanded.SCC no. 3199/2002500,34. IPC65/2003Order dated 05-07-2002 JMFC, Newasa, Dist. Ahamadnagar.208/2002500, 34 IPC.108/2003Order dated 21-09-2002 by JMFC, Sangamner Dist.Ahmednagar1246/2002295-A, 499, 500, 501 `read with 34 IPC109 /2003Order dated 07-08-2002 JMFC, Kopargaon, Dist. Ahmednagar.1292/2002500, 109, 120B/34 IPC557/2003Order dated 14-07-2003 by JMFC, Chalisgaon...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »