Mumbai Aurangabad Court July 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.
Damu Dagdu Patil and Others Vs. Dilipsingh Pratapsingh Patil and Other ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
Heard. Admit. Taken up for final disposal with the consent of the counsel for rival parties. 2. These second appeals have been filed by most of the newly enrolled members of both the rival sides and one of them is old member out of 80. The following substantial question of law is framed. Substantial Question Whether the new or old members of the trust enrolled by both the group i. e. group led by Deelipsing Patil and group led by Shakil Musa Patel were necessary parties before the District Court in the proceedings U/Sec. 72(1) of the Trust Act and whether they are aggrieved persons? Answer No. 3. Mr. P. M. Shah, the learned senior advocate with Mr. S. P. Shah, the learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. R. R. Mantri, Mr. V. D. Salunke, Mr. Sidhartha Yawalkar, Mr. S. P. Brahme, the learned advocates appearing for appellants in these appeals made the following submissions. A. That, the appellants represented by them in these second appeals are amongst the newly enrolled members from the l...
Babybai and Another Vs. Ganesh
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the parties. 2. This Civil Revision Application takes exception to the order dated 19th April, 2012 below Exhibit-40 in Regular Civil Suit No.222 of 2010 passed by the 5th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Beed. The back ground facts as disclosed in the Civil Revision Application for filing the same are as under :- 3. The applicants are original plaintiffs. The applicants instituted suit praying therein for removal of encroachment by the respondent and for perpetual injunction. According to the applicants, the property over which the suit is filed is Grampanchayat Property No.320/City Survey No.735. The total measurement of CTS No.735 is 22 x 60 feet. It is the case of the applicants that, out of 22 x 60 feet, 5 x 60 feet is disputed. It is the contention of the applicants that, non-applicant in collusion with Gramsevak of village created false record; relying on the said record, the non-applicant is trying to en...
Vishwambhar S/O Malharrao Kulkarni, (Niturkar), (Since Deceased, Throu ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
1] This Civil Revision Application takes exception to the judgment and order, dated 30.6.2003, passed by the learned District Judge, Latur, in Rent Appeal No. 3 of 1998. 2] The facts for filing this Civil Revision Application, as stated in the Revision Application, are as under: It is the case of the revision applicants, who are the legal representatives of original petitioner/landlord Vishwambhar, that the suit premises consists of a shop admeasuring 15 x 20 ft. out of House No. 1270/6, situated at Gunj Golai area of Latur town. The original petitioner/landlord Vishwambhar was the owner of the suit premises and after his death, the present revision applicants/landlord (hereinafter referred to as the applicant/landlord) have inherited the suit premises. The suit premises was leased out to one Sadhuram, original respondent no.1, on monthly rent basis. Sadhuram used to run a fair price shop in the suit premises. However, subsequently respondent no.2 i.e. Radhesham started Ravi Bhandi Sto...
Sambhaji Khanduji Nagare, Died, Through L.Rs. and Others Vs. Taher Kha ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
1. Rule, returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, taken up final hearing. It is the case of the applicant that one deceased Sambhaji Khanduji Nagare and present revision applicant Nos.2 and 3 had filed R.C.S. No.346 of 1995 for recovery of possession in the Court of C.J.S.D., at Aurangabad against the present respondents No.1 and 2. It is the case of the applicants that in the said suit the present respondent No.1 was served with a summons and he reported appearance through his Advocate Kazi Ziauddin Khan and later on failed to file written statement and participate in the proceedings. The respondent No.2 reported appearance through his advocate and filed his written statement. However, thereafter remained absent. The said suit came to be decreed vide judgment and decree dated 31st March, 2001. 2. The respondent No.1 filed appeal against the said judgment and decree before the lower appellate Court along with an application for condonation of delay...
Bhaskar S/O Laxmanrao Kadam Vs. the Additional Collector and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-29-2013
Heard Mr M.V. Ghatge, learned Counsel for the petitioner; Mr K.M. Suryawanshi, learned A.G.P. for respondent nos.1 and 3; Mr B.G. Deshmukh, learned Counsel for respondent no.2; Mr V.J. Dixit, learned Senior Counsel with Mr P.B. Rakhunde for respondent nos. 4 to 12 and Mr M.R. Sonawane, learned Counsel for respondents no.13 to 15, at length. Rule. The learned Counsel for the respective respondents waive service. At the request and by consent of learned Counsel for the parties, Rule is made returnable forthwith and the petition is taken up for final hearing. 2. By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 17th June, 2013, passed by the Additional Collector, Nanded, in dispute styled as an appeal preferred by him under section 35 (3-B) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1958 (for short Act). By that order, the Additional Collector dismissed the dispute referred by the petitioner, challenging th...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sulbha and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-29-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard. 2. Admit. With consent of both the sides, heard the appeal finally at the stage of admission, since only issue of quantum of compensation in Motor Accident Claims Petition is involved. 3. Deceased Pappu Arun Karale died in motor vehicle accident, who was proved to be 19 years old at the time of his death. Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal held that the deceased was earning Rs.3000/- per month. He was a bachelor. Present respondent Nos.1 and 2 being his parents are dependents. In the circumstances, learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal deducted 1/3rd amount towards personal expenses of the deceased and after applying multiplier of 18 to the loss of dependency granted compensation of Rs.4,32,000/-. Towards non-pecuniary damages, an amount of Rs.15,000/- was granted and thus total compensation came to Rs.4,47,000/-. 4. Mr. Deshpande, learned Counsel for the appellant/insurance company submits that when deceased was admittedly a bachelor, in view of ratio laid d...
Bhaskar S/O. Subrav Jagtap and Others Vs. Pandurang S/O. Baburao Jagta ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-26-2013
Heard Mr.M.P.Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.G.V.Mohekar, learned counsel for the respondents, at length. 2] Rule. Mr.Mohekar waives service for the respondents. At the request and by consent of the parties, Rule is made returnable forthwith and the petition is taken up for final hearing. 3] A short but interesting question arises in the present petition. The respondents (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs) instituted Regular Civil Suit No.545 of 2006 on 13th September, 2006 against the petitioners (hereinafter referred to as the defendants) for declaration that the plaintiffs are the owners and in possession of one mango tree situate in gat no.152 admeasuring 5 H 65 R situate at Mauje Satephal, Tq.Kalamb, District Osmanabad (for short the said tree). The plaintiffs also sought perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from obstructing the plaintiffs from enjoying the said tree. 4] The defendants resisted the suit by filing written statement dated 17th...
Raghunath Madhav Shimpi Vs. Digambar Kashinath Shimpi and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Mr.L.V.Sangit, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Snehal Raut, learned counsel for respondent no.2, at length. 2. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the original defendant has challenged the judgment and decree dated 29th March, 1986 passed by the learned IInd Jt. Civil Judge, Junior Division, Jalgaon in Regular Civil Suit No.41 of 1983 as also the judgment and decree dated 13th April, 1992 passed by the learned IInd Addl. District Judge, Jalgaon in Civil Appeal No.189 of 1986. By these orders, the Courts below decreed the suit instituted by the respondents (hereinafter referred as "the plaintiffs") under the provisions of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (for short "the Act") and passed decree of eviction against the defendant on the ground of default in payment of rent as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. 3. The dispute between the parties is in respect of a room admeasuring 10 ft. x 12...
Nilesh Baburao Gitte and Another Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-23-2013
NareshH Patil, J. 1) The appellants have challenged the judgment and order of conviction for an offence punishable under section 302 of Indian Penal Code dated 22nd June 2012 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-2, Ambajogai, in Sessions Case No.42 of 2011. The appellants were sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-each, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for three months. 2) The prosecution case, in brief, is as under:-- On 22-7-2010 at 11.00 a.m. the Deputy Superintendent of Police Smt. Swati Bhore received an anonymous phone call informing that funeral of deceased Sunanda Baburao Gitte was to be carried out. The officer intimated Police Inspector Shri. Kale of Parali Rural Police Station to visit the spot at Talani village. The police rushed to the spot. They found that preparations for cremation of deceased Sunanda had begun. They enquired and saw the dead body. After inspection they found ligature marks and injury on back side of skul...
Machindra and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-23-2013
A.I.S. Cheema, J. 1. Criminal Appeal No.03/2000 has been filed by original accused No.1 Machindra Dashrath Jadhav and original accused No.6 Ayub Umar Pathan. Criminal Appeal No.05/2000 has been filed by original accused No.5 Umar Daulu Pathan, original accused No.8 Nasibabee Shaikh Umar and original accused No.19 Yasin Biban Pathan. These five are out of 19 accused against whom charge sheet was filed by Police Station, Waluj on the complaint of one Ahmedkhan Lalkhan Pathan in Crime No. 111/1994 under Sections 302, 147, 148, 149 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC in brief). Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Gangapur, Dist. Aurangabad committed the case to Court of Sessions and the 19 accused were tried before 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad for the charge under Sections 147, 148, 302 r/w 149, 324 r/w 149 of IPC. By judgment dated 23.12.1999, the above five accused came to be convicted and were sentenced to imprisonment for life under Section 302 r/w 149; rigorous imp...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »