Mumbai Aurangabad Court October 2014 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.
Pandharinath Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-29-2014
1. The appeal is filed against judgment and order of Sessions Case No.109/1999 which was pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon. In the case filed against the appellant for offence punishable under section 302 of I.P.C., the appellant is convicted and sentenced by the Trial court for offence punishable under section 304(I) of I.P.C. He is sentenced to suffer R.I. for seven years and fine of Rs.500/- is imposed on him. Both the sides are heard. 2. It is the case of State that on the night between 25.3.1999 and 26.3.1999 when a lady by name Smt. Kantabai, who was aged about 40 years at the relevant time, was sleeping in the courtyard of her house, deceased Pradeep came there. It was 11.30 p.m. Pradeep tried to establish illicit relations with the lady and on that night, he wanted to have sex with her. Kantabai was deserted by her husband and she was living with her daughter in the said house. Accused/appellant was sleeping inside of the house of Smt. Kantabai at the r...
Sanjay Prabhakar Bhosale Vs. The Additional Commissioner, Aurangabad a ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-29-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties. 2. Rule. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith and the petition is taken up for final disposal. 3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 1.9.2014, delivered by respondent No.1 - Additional Commissioner, Aurangabad. 4. Contention of the petitioner is that in the election to the Gram Panchayat, Matola, held in October, 2012, respondent No.4 was elected as a Member of the said Gram Panchayat. By the judgment and order dated 13.2.2014, respondent No.4 was held guilty in Summary Criminal Trial No.1524 of 2012 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He was convicted under Section 255(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and was sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for six months. The amount of Rs.2,70,000/- was directed to be paid to the complainant, failing which, respondent No.4 was to suffer further simple imprisonment for three months. 5. The petitioner further contends tha...
Anusayabai Vs. State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary, Department ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-28-2014
R.M.Borde, J.: 1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties. 2. Instant petition is presented by Sarpanch of Village Panchayat Walki, Tq. Hadgaon, District Nanded, on behalf of village panchayat, requesting for issuance of appropriate orders to the Respondents prohibiting holding of cattle bazar on every Thursday at Lyahari/Walki phata, Tq.Hadgaon, District Nanded, without issuance of prior license by Zilla Parishad, Nanded. 3. It is not a matter of dispute that cattle bazar is being held at village Walki, Tq. Hadgaon, since last more than 100 years. Petitioner has grievance in respect of holding of parallel cattle bazar at Lyahari/Walki Phata, which is at a distance of about 6 Kms on every Thursday. It is informed that cattle bazar is being held illegally in the land belonging to Respondent No.6 and at the instance of village panchayat Lyahari, represented by Respondent No.7 Sarpanch. 4. The petitioner has tende...
Ramesh Babulal Chaudhari Vs. The State of Maharashtra, through Secreta ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-28-2014
P.R. Bora, J. 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition with a prayer to quash and set aside the F.I.R. No. 3/2013, registered at Nandurbar City Police Station on 05.01.2013 and has also prayed for setting aside the charge sheet filed on the basis of the said F.I.R. in Regular Criminal Case No.23/2014 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nandurbar for the offences punishable under Sections 32B and 33 of the Bombay Money Lenders Act, 1946 (hereinafter referred to as the 1946 Act for short) and Sections 420 read with Section 511 of Indian Penal Code. 2. Though the petitioner was initially praying for setting aside the entire charge sheet, during the course of hearing of the present petition, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is restricting his petition only to the extent of prayer clause (D), which reads thus : (D) In the alternative the action/F.I.R. to the extent of Section 420/511 I.P.C. may be quashed with all steps inv...
Ibrahim Samsher Pathan and Another Vs. The State of Maharashtra and An ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-27-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Being aggrieved by the Judgment and Order dated 3rd March, 2000 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar in Sessions Case No.82 Of 1998, convicting the Appellants [original accused Nos. 1 and 2] for the offences punishable U/Section 436 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and consequent sentence to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three [3] years and to pay fine of Rs.500/- [Rs. Five Hundred Only] each and in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for six [6] months, the original accused have preferred present Criminal Appeal. 2. In short, the prosecution case is as under:- Complainant - Rambhau Piraji Shinde and present Appellants inter se resides in the neighbourhood in a public field reserved for grazing the cattle of the villagers [xk;jk.k]. Earlier there used to quarrel between the two families. In the circumstances, on 5th May, 1998 at about 12.30 a.m. to 1.00 a.m., the complainant noticed that roof of his house had caught fire and ...
Arun Vs. Varsha and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-14-2014
V. K. Jadhav, J. 1. This is an appeal filed by the petitioner-husband challenging the judgment and decree passed by the learned Judge of Family Court, Aurangabad in petition No. 38 of 2001, dismissing the petition of petitioner-husband filed under Section 13 (1-A) (ii) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as the said Act), praying therein for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce. (For the sake of convenience, hereinafter the parties shall be referred by their status before the Family Court i.e. petitioner and respondent). 2. Brief facts, giving raise to the present appeal, are as follows:- a) The marriage between the petitioner-husband and respondentwife was solemnized on 7.6.1983 according to Hindu rites and rituals. They have a son and a daughter out of their marital wedlock. Their marriage is still subsisting. b) According to petitioner-petitioner-husband in the year 1988, respondent-wife on her own accord left the house of petitioner-...
Shah Investments, Financials, Developments and Consultants Pvt. Ltd. a ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-14-2014
R.M. Borde, J. 1. Since both the petitions raise common question for adjudication, both the petitions are considered together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties. 3. In Writ Petition No.7843 of 2014, presented by Shah Investments, Financials, Developments and Consultants Pvt. Ltd., and Control Automation Projects Pvt. Ltd., challenge is raised to the decision taken by Aurangabad Municipal Corporation to declare the petitioner disqualified on consideration of technical bids and further declaring Respondent No.3 as L1 Contractor. Whereas, in Writ Petition No.8211 of 2014 apart from seeking to quash the decision declaring concerned petitioner disqualified on opening the technical bid, a further relief is sought in the nature of issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing the decision awarding contract to Respondent No.3 in pursuance to the Tender Notice20142...
Dr. Shivdas Vs. State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Higher and ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-14-2014
S.V. Gangapurwala, J. 1. Heard. 2. Vide the present Writ Petition, the petitioner assails the entire selection process and appointments for the post of Assistant Professors in Respondent-College, pursuant to the advertisement dated 20.9.2011. 3. Mr.Gadhe, learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments strenuously put forth following submissions : a) Though the petitioner had applied for the post of Assistant Professor in Sociology, still, the petitioner has locus-standi and right to challenge the entire selection process and appointments made for all the twelve (12) posts in respect of different subjects including Sociology subject as the recruitment was out-come of fraud, manipulation and conspiracy. The learned counsel to buttress his submission relies on the judgment of the Apex Court in a case of "Dr.Ram Tawakya Singh Vs. State of Bihar and others" reported in 2013 CJ (SC) 1000. So also the judgment of the Apex Court in a case of "Raju Ramsing Wasve Vs. Mahes...
Renuka Vishnu Ghule Vs. The State of Maharashtra, through its Principa ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-14-2014
R.M. Borde, J. 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties. 2. The petitioner is praying to quash notification dated 01.01.2014 and consequential orders of removal communicated by the Deputy Commissioner of Child Development, Maharashtra State, Pune, District Women and Child Development Officer, Aurangabad, on 24.01.2014, thereby directing termination of petitioner from the post of Chairperson of Child Welfare Committee, Aurangabad. 3. The petitioner came to be appointed as a Member of Child Welfare Committee, Aurangabad, by virtue of Notification issued in that behalf by the State Government on 02.06.2008. It is the contention of the petitioner that there were certain complaints received against the then Chairperson and Members of the Child Welfare Committee, Aurangabad. In pursuance thereof, a show cause notice came to be issued on 08.02.2010 by the Commissioner, Women and Child Development Department, Maharashtra Sta...
Pravara Medical Trust and Another Vs. The Union of India, through the ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-10-2014
R.M. Borde, J. 1. Petitioner No.1 Pravara Medical Trust is registered under the provisions of Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 and is also registered as society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, on 28.12.1972. Petitioner No.2 Pravara Institute of Medical Sciences is registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 on 10.07.2001 and is also registered as a Trust on 16.12.2003. It is also admitted that petitioner no.2, by virtue of notification issued by the Joint Secretary to the Government of India on 29.09.2003, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, has been declared to be a deemed university. Petitioner no.2 operates Medical College, Dental College, Nursing College and other Health related educational institutions. 2. Petitioners are taking exception to the direction issued by the University Grants Commission to tender information, as requested by Respondent No.3 in his application dated 05.12.2008. The University ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »