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.
Jaisingrao Abasaheb and Others Vs. Pratapsing Wamanrao Rane and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-01-2013
This appeal is filed by respondents no. 1 to 5 of Land Acquisition Case No. 77 of 1989 against the Judgment and Award dated 14/08/2001 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Mapusa in the said case. 2. It is seen from the records that the appeal has been shown as dismissed as against Respondents no. 3, 4 and 7 on the ground that they were not served and no steps were taken to serve them within the time fixed. However, it is noticed that Respondents no. 3 and 4 are none else than Respondents no.2(1) and 2(2) who are duly served. It is further seen that Respondent no.7 is respondent no.2(6) who has also been duly served. It is, therefore, clear that the appeal has been wrongly shown as dismissed as against Respondents no. 3, 4 and 7. It is seen that Respondent no.2(7) is unmarried daughter of deceased Respondent no.2 who could not be served and the appeal has been dismissed as against her. However, she is from the set of the claimants who are duly represented by the learned Adv...
Smt. Mannekben S. Tandel and Others Vs. Pascoal Fernandes and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-01-2013
Oral Judgment:- Heard Shri Shivan Desai, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Shri A. D. Bhobe, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.1. 2. The above petition challenges the judgment passed by the learned Administrative Tribunal dated 14.07.2010 whereby the tenancy revision preferred by the respondent no.1 came to be allowed and the application for condonation of delay filed by the petitioners before the Dy. Collector along with the application for leave to challenge the judgment passed by the learned Mamlatdar came to be quashed and set aside. 3. Shri Desai, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has assailed the impugned judgment on the ground that the Dy. Collector upon appreciating the evidence on record has come to the conclusion that the petitioners have made out a case to condone the delay. The learned counsel has pointed out that the petitioners have filed an application for condonation of delay immediately after they learnt about the order passed ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›