Mumbai Aurangabad Court July 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.
Bhalchandra and Another Vs. Shardabai and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
1. Both the appeals are filed against judgment and award of Claim Petition No.96/2003 which was pending before the Claims Tribunal, Jalgaon. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 from the two appeals were claimants and the claim was filed under section 166 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (in short 'the Act'). The Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs. 9,50,180/- with interest at the rate of 7% p.a. from the date of petition. The owner of the offending vehicle has filed First Appeal No. 439/2007 and the Insurance Company has filed First Appeal No.927/2007. All the sides are heard. 2. According to the claimants, the accident took place on 11.6.2003 on Ambad Charphula-Mantha Road at about 9.30 p.m. and the spot is situated near Revgaon, in Jalna city. 3. It is the case of claimants that the deceased Manohar Ugale was present as pillion rider on motorcycle and the motor cycle was being driven by one Laxman Gangadhare. It is their case that Laxman drove the motorcycle bearing No.MH-21/B-4005 rashly and neglig...
Mahesh Gangaram Badgujar and Others Vs. The State of Maharashtra and O ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
Shinde, J. 1. This petition has been filed praying therein for directions to the respondents No.3 to 8 to pay each of the petitioners an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- for violation of their fundamental rights due to illegal arrest, detention, assault and, mental and physical torture to them while they were in police custody. Further prayer is made for quashing FIR. There is also a prayer seeking directions to take appropriate departmental action against respondents No.3 to 8 for violation of fundamental rights of the petitioners due to illegal arrest, detention, assault and, mental and physical torture to the petitioners while they were in police custody. There is further prayer to direct the respondent No.6 Mr. Mukund Patil, P.S.I., Songir Police Station to pay the petitioner No.3 Prakash Marathe an additional amount of Rs.2,00,000/- due to severe assault by Mukund Patil, as the ears of the petitioner No.3 have become permanently disabled and lost its hearing capacity to greater extent. 2. ...
The State of Maharashtra and Another Vs. Anil and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-11-2014
S.S. Shinde, J. 1. In Sessions Case No.28 of 2013 the learned Additional Sessions Judge Shrirampur has awarded death sentence to the accused therein, the proceedings in the said case, have been therefore forwarded to this Court for confirmation under section 366 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The accused has also preferred an appeal, which was admitted by this Court and same is registered as Criminal Appeal No.55 of 2014. As both the matters are arising out of one judgment, the arguments in both the matters are simultaneously heard and we find it expedient to decide both the matters by common reasoning. However, since the very conviction has been challenged by the convict, the only proper course would be to first decide the Criminal Appeal so filed by the accused, for the reason that, only if the order of conviction is maintained by this Court, the further question will arise whether or not the death sentence awarded by the trial Court is sustainable and is to be confirmed or otherwis...
Sikandar Hussen Pathan Vs. The State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-10-2014
1. The Appellant (hereinafter referred as accused) has been convicted by 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar in Sessions Case No.8 of 2000, for offence punishable under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short I.P.C.) and has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-. In default, he has to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, this Appeal has been filed. 2. The complainant Khalil Dilawarkhan Pathan filed the complaint registered at Crime No.215 of 1998 with Kotwali Police Station, Ahmednagar. It related to assault by the Appellant-accused. The Appellant-accused also filed a counter case against the complainant Khalil and his sister Naushadbee regarding assault by knife, leading to filing of Sessions Case No.182 of 1998 under Section 307 of I.P.C. Consequently, both the cases were tried by the Court of Sessions and in both the matters the Sessions Court convicted resp...
Shaikh Asif Ismail Vs. The State of Maharashtra, (Notice to be served ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-10-2014
1. This appeal is by original accused (hereinafter referred to as accused), who has been convicted by 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, on 19.5.2000 in Sessions Case No.80/1999, for offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC for short) and has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for two months. 2. The case of prosecution in brief is that:- (a) A.S.I. Laxman Kusalkar (P.W.7) of Kotwali Police Station, Ahmednagar, on 22.1.1995, received phone call from Civil Hospital, Ahmednagar that one Shabana Hamji Shaikh (hereinafter referred to as victim) with burns was admitted to the hospital. This A.S.I. went to the hospital and after completing formalities, recorded the statement of Shabana, which was recorded as her dying declaration (Exhibit 32). On the same day, yet another dying declaration of Shabana was recorded by Special Executive Magistrate (P.W.2) Ruth w/o ...
Chandrabai w/o Laxman Samindrache (Died) through LRs. Vs. Venkatrao Tu ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-10-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. This second appeal challenges the judgment and decree dated 29th December, 1989 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded in Regular Civil Appeal No.3358 of 1983. By this judgment, the learned District Judge had set aside the decree for partition passed by the trial Court. 2. Fact leading to the present litigation are as under: The original plaintiff was Chandrabai widow of Laxman. She came to Court with following complaint: "Chandrabai asserted that her husband Laxman died in 1954 leaving behind the suit property. The suit property is a piece of land admeasuring 2 acres 34 Gunthas at village Ravvankkola, Taluka Mukhed, District Nanded. She said that on the death of her husband which occurred in 1954, she become entitled to half share in the suit land and said that remaining half share would go to her only son Sangram. The partition did not take place between Sangram and Chandrabai. Her son Sangram continued management of the land. In the course of time,...
Mustafa Fattu Tadvi Vs. The State of Maharashtra Through Police Statio ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-10-2014
1. These two Cri.Revn.Appln. can be disposed of by the present common judgment. Though two different Criminal Appeals were preferred before the lower appellate court bearing Cri.Appeal Nos. 31/1997 and 32/1997, since the appellant and the complainant were common and the offence was in respect of the transaction of the same Society about the misappropriation, the learned lower appellate court by its common judgment dated 9th June, 2000 was pleased to dismiss both the criminal Appeals, thereby, confirming the Judgments and Orders passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, F.C., Raver, Dist. Jalgaon passed in Regular Criminal Case Nos. 132/1987 and 133/1987 convicting the applicant for the offence punishable U/Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. In both the Regular Criminal Cases, the learned Magistrate by his separate Judgments dated 9th June, 2000 convicted the present applicant for the offence punishable U/Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and directed him to suffer Ri...
Naziruddin Khan s/o Mumtazuddin Khan Since deceased through Legal Repr ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2014
1. Admit. 2. Notice after admission made returnable forthwith. By consent heard both the sides for final disposal. 3. The appeal is filed against the judgment and decree of Special Civil Suit No.487 of 1998 which was pending in the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad. The trial Court has given decree of specific performance of contract in favour of respondent No.1. It is ex parte decree. 4. The suit was filed in respect of two agricultural lands bearing Gat Nos.155 and 209 situated at village Teesgaon, Tahsil and District Aurangabad. It is the case of plaintiff that defendants had agreed with him to sell the suit property in the month of December 1993 and the terms and conditions of the agreement were reduced into writing and were signed by the defendant No.1 for himself and as Power of Attorney for defendant Nos.2 to 4 and defendant No.9. Defendant Nos.1 to 3 are brothers inter se. Defendant No.4 is the wife of deceased brother of defendant Nos.1 to 3 and defendant N...
Uttam Vs. Babita and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-08-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Uttam s/o Kisan Pawar felt aggrieved by the Judgment and Order dated 6th February, 2001 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Aurangabad in Petition No.A-721/1999, by which the learned Judge, Family court was pleased to allow the Petition partly, filed on behalf of present Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and the court below was pleased to direct the present applicant to pay monthly maintenance allowance @ Rs.500/- to Resp.No.1 from the month of December, 1999 onwards and also directed that, from the month of December, 1999, the applicant to pay monthly maintenance allowance @ Rs.250/- each to respondent Nos. 2 and 3. 2. I have heard Mr. S.A. Dhengle, learned counsel appearing for the applicant in extenso. I have also heard Mr. Bhange, learned A.P.P. for Respondent No.4. Though Resp.Nos. 1 to 3 are served, nobody appeared on their behalf. 3. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, the court below had committed serious mistake in granting maintenance allowance...
The State of Maharashtra, Through Chitra @ Suchitra Yuvraj Avhad Vs. S ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-08-2014
A.I.S. Cheema, J. 1. This Appeal by State is against acquittal of the Respondents (original accused Nos.1, 2, 4 to 6 and 8 to 10, hereafter referred as accused with their original numbers). The accused faced trial in the Sessions Case No.56 of 1998 before Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule for offence punishable under Section 395, 396, 397, 402, 412, 414, 457 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short I.P.C.). During pendency of trial, accused No.1 absconded and his trial was separated and charge dated 14th February 2000, was framed against original accused Nos. 2 to 10. It included original accused No.3 Shrimant Vyankat Kale and original accused No.7 Das @ Paltya @ Gas @ Chindhya Bapu Bhosle. In the course of recording of evidence against original accused Nos.2 to 10, accused No.1 was apprehended and charge was framed against him on 4th July, 2001 and witnesses examined till then were recalled. In the further trial, accused Nos. 3 and 7 absconded and thus trial was split up ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »