Mumbai Goa Court February 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.
Mrs. Terezinha Fernandes, Junior Stenographer (Regular Establishment) ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-14-2013
Oral Judgment: (V.M. Kanade, J.) Heard Mr. Pangam, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Kakodkar, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. 3. By this petition which is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: (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 Respondents to pay to the Petitioner, all arrears of salary in terms of ACP Scheme Scale of Rs.4500-125-7000 with effect from 26/8/2004 and continue to pay the same with interest at the rate of 15% per annum; (B) This Hon'ble Court also 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 Respondents to revise the Petitioner's Pay Scale in terms of the Sixth Pay Commission Recommendations with e...
Limo Cortez Alias Limo Narvekar and Others Vs. the Chief Town Planner, ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-13-2013
Oral Judgment: (V.M. Kanade, J.) After we allowed the Misc. Civil Application No. 140 of 2013, we permitted the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners to argue the case on merits, he has argued the matter at length. He has argued fully each and every point and also has given detailed reply in rejoinder on behalf of the Petitioners. By that time the Court time was over and therefore we pronounced the Order and informed the parties that we are not inclined to entertain the petition and dismissed the petition with costs which are quantified at Rs. 1 Lakh which are to be paid within four weeks. We have further observed that if the costs are not paid within a period of four weeks, the same shall be recovered as arrears of land revenue and the proceeds shall be paid to the Goa Bar Association Library. 2. On the next date, due to paucity of time the Judgment could not be dictated in the open Court, however, we informed the parties that taking into consideration the peculiar ci...
Francisco X. Jacques, Chairman, Batim Tenant Association and Another V ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-12-2013
U.V. Bakre, J. A letter dated 31/08/1999 was received from the petitioner of Writ Petition No. 168/2000. By this letter, the petitioner brought to the attention of this Court the alleged illegalities committed by respondents no. 7 and 8 by purchasing a large number of paddy fields at Goa Velha bearing survey nos. 14/1 to 14/35 and by illegally converting them into developed plots for sale. It was alleged that he had complained to the village Panchayat of St. Andre, Collector of North Goa, Directorate of Health Services, Directorate of Panchayats, Block development office and Town and Country Planning Department. It was also alleged that the said activities damaged the paddy fields and caused ecological imbalance inter alia, by the land being filled up with mud, which in turn, obstructed the free flow of water, resulting in floods and losses to the farmers and tenants. The petitioner further alleged that his complaints to the authorities remained unanswered and, in fact, the Town and Co...
Union of India, Through Central Public Works Department, Represented b ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-08-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Shri M. Amonkar, learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri Sudesh Usgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent waives service. 3. The above petition challenges an order dated 15/01/2013 passed by the learned Adhoc District Judge, North Goa, Panaji in Civil Suit No.42/2006 whereby the evidence of the petitioner who is the plaintiff to the suit came to be closed. The petitioner seeks for the following relief: (a) For a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, calling for the records and proceedings of Civil Suit No.42/2006 pending before the trial Court i.e. the Ad-Hoc District Judge-I, (Fast Track), Panaji Goa and after perusing the legality of the impugned order dated 15/01/2013 the same be quashed and set aside and the Trial Court be directed to give opportuni...
Suresh Bhat and Others Vs. Pedro Damiao Lazario Caeiro and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-07-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Shri S.D. Padiyar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Shri A. Gomes Pereira, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents waives service. 3. The above petition seeks to quash an orders passed by the learned Civil Judge Junior Division dated 17/10/2012 and 9/11/2012 whereby the learned Judge has closed the evidence of PW3 and proceeded to record the evidence of the respondents herein and rejected the application to recall/review the said order. 4. Shri S.D. Padiyar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners has pointed out that the matter was posted for evidence of PW3 on 17/10/2012 and there was a direction by the learned Judge to initially produce the affidavit of the said witness on 29/09/2012. The learned Counsel further points out that on the said date the learned Judge had directed the petitioners to furnish such advance copy of ...
Smt. Maria Alda Fernandes Vs. Gabriel Coutinho, (Deceased Through Lega ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-07-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Mrs. A. Agni, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri G. Shirodkar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents waives service. 3. The above petition challenges an order dated 28/11/2012 passed in Regular Civil Suit No.123/2003/A by the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Vasco da Gama, whereby an application under Order 26 Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Code came to be rejected. 4. Briefly the facts of the case are that the petitioner is claiming to be the owner of the property bearing survey no.69/1 of Thana, Cortalim village. The petitioner filed the suit on the premise that respondents have encroached into her property and extended the existing house. It is further the case of the petitioner that the respondents were not entitled to carry out any such extension and consequently the suit came to be filed for demolition of such extensio...
Ramnath Kare and Another Vs. State Represented by Mr. Vivek Marathe, I ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-06-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Shri G.K. Sardessai, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Shri D. Lawande, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent. 2. Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent waives service. 3. The above petition challenges an order dated 11/07/2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, South Goa at Margao disposing of Criminal Revision Application No.63/2010. 4. During the course of the hearing of the above petition, it is pointed out by the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties that in similar circumstances this Court by order dated 29/03/2012 passed in Criminal Writ Petition No.13/2012 has remanded the matter to the learned Revisional Court to decide the revision afresh. Shri D. Lawande, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent has also raised objection to the consideration of the documents produced by the petitioners duri...
Smt. Queteria Maria Pereira de Sa alias Rosa Maria D'sa and Others Vs. ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-06-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Shri Rohit Bras De Sa, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Shri Zeller D' Souza, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent nos. 5 to 10 and Shri Sagar Dhargalkar, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the Respondent nos. 1 to 4. 2. The above Petition seeks for the following relief: For a writ of Certiorari or any other writ, order or direction calling for the records and proceedings in Civil Suit no. 34/2009 on the file of the Adhoc District Judge I F, South Goa, at Margao, and after considering the legality, proprietary and correctness of the impugned Order dated 19.1.2011 and Order dated 20.6.2011, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the Impugned Order made on the application filed under Order VI Rule 17 and Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the Petitioners filed a suit on the basis that they are owners in possession of the property which they had purchased pursuan...
Mrs. Jennifer Krishnan Vs. State of Goa, Through the Chief Secretary, ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-05-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Ms. Collasso, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Ms. Milena Gomes e Pinto, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the Respondents. 2. Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents waives service. 3. The above Petition seeks to quash an Order passed by the Respondent no.2 dated 24.01.2013, whereby an application filed by the Petitioner for parole came to be rejected. 4. Ms. Collasso, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, has pointed out that under Rule 324 of the Goa Prison Rules 2006, there are specific situations wherein a prisoner can seek parole. Learned Counsel has taken me through the said provisions and pointed out that considering the intent of such Rule, it clearly shows that the right of a prisoner for parole is not restricted only to specific situations as stipulated therein. Learned Counsel further pointed out that the provisions itself qualifies the situation wit...
Mrs. Maria a Silveira Since Deceased Represented by L.Rs. Vs. State of ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-05-2013
Oral Judgment: (V.M. Kanade, J.) Heard learned Counsel on behalf of the petitioners and learned Additional Government Advocate on behalf of respondents no.1 to 4. 2. It is to be noted that Rule was issued and respondent no.5 was served. Thereafter, he had appointed Advocate. Neither Advocate nor the members of respondent no.5 appear before this Court. 3. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are seeking the following reliefs : "(i) That this Court may be pleased to issue writ in the nature of Mandamus/ writ in the nature of Certiorari directing respondent nos.1 to 4 to take immediate action against respondent no.5 and others and preventing inundation of the Khazan lands. (ii) That this Court may be pleased to issue writ of Mandamus/ Certiorari directing to respondents no.1 to 4 to see that no pisciculture activities are carried out in the paddy fields marked in green shading. (iii) That this Court may be pleased to issue writ of Mandamus...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »