Mumbai Goa Court January 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.
Khr Hospitality India Ltd. Vs. State of Goa, Through Secretary, Secret ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-15-2013
Oral Judgment: (V.M. Kanade, J.) Heard Mr. Dessai, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Lawande, learned Counsel for respondents No.1 and 2 and Mr. De Souza, learned Counsel for respondent No.3. We have also heard the intervenor in person. 2. Rule. By consent heard forthwith. 3. By this petition which is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner which is a company running a Five Star Resort is seeking an appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing and setting aside the order dated 30th November, 2012 issued by respondent No.3- Village Panchayat of Majorda-Utorda-Calata. In this petition, an intervention application is filed by one Aleixo Arnolfo Pereira for permitting him to intervene in the petition and seeking a direction for dismissing the writ petition. 4. The brief facts giving rise to the present petition are as under: The petitioner is owner of a property bearing Survey Nos. 45/1, 43, 44, 45, and 46 of Village Utorda, where it is runnin...
Vpk Urban Co-operative Credit Society Limited Vs. Mrs. Nandini Shankar ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
Heard Mr. Pangam, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Lobo, learned Counsel, appointed under Legal Aid Scheme, on behalf of the respondent no.1. 2. The appellant is the complainant of Criminal Case No. 393/NIA/2008/B and this appeal has been preferred against the Judgment and Order dated 29/10/2009 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class at Ponda ( J.M.F.C., for short) in the said Criminal Case. 3. The complainant had filed the said case against the accused, who is the respondent no. 1 in this appeal, for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, (N.I. Act, for short). The case of the complainant is as follows:- It is a Credit Co-operative Society registered under Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act as made applicable to the State of Goa and having its head office at Mardol, Ponda, Goa and its branches in various parts of Goa including the one at Corlim, Goa. The complainant is engaged in financial business of accepting deposits incl...
Gl Asia Mauritius Ii Cayman Limited and Others Vs. Pinfold Overseas Li ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Shri M.S. Sonak, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Shri R. Gupta, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The above petition challenges an order dated 21/08/2010 passed by the learned District Judge, South Goa at Margao in Arbitration Application No.31/2008 whereby the preliminary objection raised by the petitioners herein with regard to the jurisdiction of the learned Judge to entertain an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (herein after referred to as 'the said Act') came to be disposed of inter alia holding that the Court had jurisdiction to entertain such application. 3. The above matter was adjourned from time to time in view of the fact that the point for consideration in the present petition as to whether Part I of the said Act is applicable in cases of international commercial agreements was under consideration before the Apex Court. It was pointed out by the learned Counsel that the ma...
Nobel Vaz and Others Vs. Member Secretary, Margao Planning and Develop ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-08-2013
Oral Judgment: (V.M. Kanade, J.) Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the reliefs claimed by the petitioners in para (A), are as under : "(A) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the Respondent Nos.1 to 5 to take appropriate action in the matter of illegal constructions/activities being carried out by the Respondent Nos.6 and 7, viz.:- (a) The installation and operation of Restaurant in the basement of Building Nos.22, 23 and 24; (b) The installation and commencement of Outdoor Restaurant and tandoori kitchen in the open spaces as indicated in Photograph at "ANNEXURE D"; (c) The illegal construction and storage of L.P.G. Cylinders therein as indicated in Photograph at "ANNEXURE C"; (d) Construction of Building Nos.33 and...
innovatherm Gmbh and Another Vs. Sesa Goa Limited
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
V.M. Kanade, J. The appellant is challenging the judgment and order passed by learned Single Judge dated 22/11/2012 in Company Application Nos.78 and 79 of 2012. By the said judgment and order, learned Single Judge was pleased to dismiss the Company Applications filed by the appellant by holding that the appellant Company had no locus to be heard in the Company Petition filed by the respondent under Section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956. 2. Brief facts which are necessary for the purpose of deciding this appeal are as under: The respondent Sesa Goa Ltd has filed Company Petition in this Court seeking sanction of proposed scheme of amalgamation and arrangement under Sections 391 to 394 read with Sections 98, 100 and 203 of the Companies Act, 1956 between Sesa Goa Ltd and Sterlite Industries India Ltd ('SIIL' for short) amalgamating Company no.1, Madras Aluminum Company Ltd ('MALCO' for short) amalgamating Company No.2, Sterlite Energy Ltd ('SEL' for short) amalgamating Company No.3, Ve...
State of Goa and Another Vs. Yashodi Y. Dessai (Expired) Through Lrs a ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-04-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Ms. S. Linhares, learned Additional Government Advocate for the appellants and Mr. P. A. Kamat, learned Advocate for the respondents. 2. The appellants have challenged the Judgment and Order dated 20.3.2002 passed by the learned Additional District Judge(II), South Goa, Margao (Reference Court, for short) in Land Acquisition 3. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the manner as they appear in the cause title of the said Land Acquisition Case No.36/1993. 4. The land which was the subject matter of the acquisition bears survey no. 200/11 of Nagorcem village and along with other land, the same was acquired for the purpose of construction of Minor Irrigation tank at Chapoli of Canacona Taluka (Additional area). The notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (L.A. Act, for short) was issued on 27/1/1989 and was published in the Government Gazette dated 2/2/1989. The Land Acquisition Officer (LAO, for short) awarded Rs. 8/- per square...
Dy. Collector and S.D.O., Mormugao, Vasco-da-gama and Another Vs. Olav ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-03-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Ms. Linhares, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants and Mr. M. B. D'Costa, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. The appellants are aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 31/08/1999 passed by the learned Additional District Judge (II) (Reference Court, for short) in Land Acquisition Case No. 116 of 1997. 3. The parties shall be referred to in the manner as they appear in the cause title of the said Land Acquisition Case. 4. Facts giving rise to the appeal, in short, are as follows: Vide notification published under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (L.A. Act, for short), in the Official Gazette dated 10/10/1991, the Government acquired land for construction of Utorda to Arossim link road (additional area). This included a portion of land admeasuring 1225 square metres from Survey No. 98/1 and a portion of land admeasuring 515 square metres from Survey No.149, of Village Arossim of Mo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›