Mumbai Goa Court July 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.
Mahanand Naik Vs. State Through P.P.
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-30-2013
U.V. Bakre, J. Heard Mr. Naik, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. Amonkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (A.P.P.) on behalf of the State. 2. By impugned Judgment dated 30/06/2011, the appellant has been convicted by the Court of Session, North Goa Panaji in Session Case No. 48 of 2009 for the offenses punishable under Sections 364, 302, 392 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.). In respect of the offence under Section 364 of I.P.C. the appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 3 years and to pay the fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to undergo imprisonment for two months. With regard to the offence under Section 302 of I.P.C., the sentence is to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay the fine of Rs. 50,000/- in default to undergo imprisonment for a term of one year. For the offence under Section 392 of I.P.C. punishment imposed upon the appellant is to undergo imprisonment for a term of five years and to pay the fi...
Rajesab Mujawar Vs. the State of Goa Through Public Prosecutor
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
U.V. Bakre, J. By this appeal, the appellant/accused, takes exception to the judgment and order dated 2nd June, 2011, passed by the Sessions Judge, North Goa, Panaji in Sessions Case No. 20/2008, by which the accused has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 392 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default, to undergo imprisonment for a term of one year; to undergo imprisonment for a term of 3 years for the offence punishable under Section 392 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default, to undergo imprisonment for a period of one year; and lastly, to undergo imprisonment for a period of three years for the offence punishable under Section 201 IPC., and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default, to undergo imprisonment for a period of six months. The fine amount has been ordered to be paid to the family of the deceased i.e. PW.21 Mahadevi,...
Krishna P. Morajkar Vs. Joe Ferrao and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
This appeal questions appellate judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mapusa whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge set aside judgment of conviction of the respondent for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentence of paying compensation quantified at Rs.4,00,000/- or in default to suffer imprisonment for one year imposed upon the respondent by the learned JMFC, 'E' Court, Mapusa Goa on the conclusion of trial of Criminal Case no.OA/NIA/759/P/O6/E before the learned Magistrate. 2. The facts which are material for deciding this appeal are as under: The appellant claimed to be a friend of respondent. The respondent approached the appellant in last week of March, 2006 stating that the respondent wanted to renovate his premises and, therefore, needed a sum of Rs.3 lacs which he would repay in about 7 to 8 months. The appellant claimed to have advanced a sum of Rs.2,40,000/- against which the respondent issued 10 cheques dated 31/0...
Gaspar Monteiro, Now Deceased Through Lrs: and Others Vs. the Deputy C ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Mr. Almeida, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and Mr. Salkar, learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondent. 2. The present appeal is directed against the Judgment and Award dated 19/07/2002 passed by the learned District Judge, South Goa, Margao, (reference court, for short) in Land Acquisition Case No. 24/1997. 3. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the manner in which their names appear in the cause title of the Land Acquisition Case No. 24/1997. The appellants are the legal representatives of the original applicant and they shall be referred to as the applicants. 4. Vide Notification issued under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (L.A. Act, for short) and published in the Government Gazette No. 2, Series II dated 9/4/1992, land was acquired for construction of Dongri-Majorda, Dongrim Kucha Gabriel Church road, Our Lady Church to Toleaband Guirim road and Godinho road, in the Village Panchayat of...
Zenito Vs. District Magistrate, North Goa and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-16-2013
Oral Judgment: (A.P. Lavande, J.) Heard Mr. S.G. Dessai, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S.R. Rivonkar, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for respondents No.1, 2 and 3 and Mr. C.A. Ferreira, Asst. Solicitor General for respondent No.4. 2. By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 13th February, 2013 passed by respondent No.1 in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 ("the Act" for short). In terms of the said order, the petitioner was detained and kept in the Central Jail, Aguada in order to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of the State or from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The petitioner in the petition has urged several grounds in support of the contention that the impugned detention order is liable to be quashed. The petitioner filed an application for his release on bail, which was granted by order dated 6th May, 2013. 3. Rep...
Smt. Sitabai R. Naik and Others Vs. the Special Land Acquisition Offic ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-12-2013
Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. Both the above appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment as they pertain to the lands acquired under the same notification and involve similar question of law. 3. Vide Notification bearing No. RD/LQN/176/71 dated 17/11/1971 issued under section 4(1) of the Land acquisition Act, 1984, (L. A. Act, for short) and published in the Government Gazette on pages no. 245246 of Series II No. 36 dated 2/12/1971, vast land from various villages was acquired for Salaulim Irrigation Project (Submergence area). This acquisition, inter alia, included lands of the appellants of both the appeals and also of one Shri Narendra Atmaram Nadkarni, from Curpem and Portem villages. By awards dated 29/1/1977 and 24/3/1977, passed under Section 11 of the L. A. Act, respectively in cases no. SLAO/13/77, pertaining to Curpem Village and SLAO/27, pertaining to Portem Village, the Special Land Acquisition Officer (S.L.A.O.) offered following rate per square metre...
Surjina Rebelo (Now Deceased) Through Her Legal Representatives and Ot ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-12-2013
Oral Judgment: By this Second Appeal, the appellants take exception to the judgment and decree dated 30th April, 1998 passed by Additional District Judge, South Goa, Margao by which Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No. 146 of 1993/I has been dismissed. By the impugned order, the appeal preferred by the present appellants against order dated 1st October, 1993 dismissing Regular Civil Suit no.1582 of 1960 has been dismissed on the ground that the suit was barred by limitation. 2. Civil Suit No. 5847 of 1950 was filed by Smt. Brigida da Silva Antao, the predecessor of respondent nos. 1 to 3 in respect of the property Raurilem. In the said suit which was filed under Portuguese Law, the plaintiff sought permanent injunction restraining late Baldomero Rebelo from interfering with the possession in respect of the suit property and application for temporary injunction was also filed in the said suit which was granted pursuant to which certain coconut trees existing in the suit property were enjoyed ...
The Director of Education Vs. Bhatikar Model High School, Represented ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-09-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Shri Noorani, learned Addl. Government Advocate, appearing for the Petitioner and Shri V. R. Tamba, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent nos. 1 and 2. 2. The above Petition challenges the Judgment/Order dated 24.06.2008, whereby the preliminary objection raised by the Petitioner herein to the maintainability of the Appeal preferred by the Respondent no.1, came to be rejected. 3. Shri Noorani, learned Addl. Government Advocate, appearing for the Petitioner, has pointed out that in terms of Section 22 of the Goa, Daman and Diu School Education Act, 1984, (herein after referred to as the 'said Act'), the Management is not entitled to pursue an appeal whereby the permission to grant major penalty has been refused. Learned Addl. Government Advocate further pointed out that, as in the present case, the Respondent no.1/Management has preferred such Appeal, the learned Tribunal was not justified to come to the conclusion that the Appeal preferred by the Respondent ...
Janardhan Kashinath Pal Vs. Harishchandra Ladu Naik and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-09-2013
Oral Judgment: This revision by original complainant is directed against the revisional order passed by learned Sessions Judge, North Goa allowing the revision preferred by the accused whereby the learned Judge quashed and set aside the complaint filed by the present applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 181, 463 and 464 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. 2. It was the applicant's case that the non-applicants accused persons as well as the applicant claim through one Shankar Pal. The applicant claims to be grandson of Shankar. The accused persons, suppressing existence of the applicant, made a declaration before the Notary Ex-Officio Sub-Registrar omitting to show that the applicant is one of the heirs of Shankar. This declaration was sought to be used by the accused nos.4 to 6 for applying for getting their names mutated in the properties. The applicant, therefore, filed complaint before learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bicholim. Learned Magistrate examined the com...
M/S. United India Insurance Company Ltd. and Another Vs. Kishore L. To ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-05-2013
The above appeal and cross-objection, both, are directed against the Judgment, Order and Decree dated 30/07/2005 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Vasco-da-Gama (trial Court) in Special Civil Suit no. 45/94/A. 2. Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the manner in which their names appear in the cause title of the said Special Civil Suit of 45/94/A. 3. The plaintiff had filed the said suit for declaration that the defendant no. 1 is liable to indemnify the plaintiff and consequently to pay Rs.13,00,000/- towards the bill no. 7/B/MS/89 dated 26/12/1989 and further to pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 26,30,174.88 along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till realisation. 4. The case of the plaintiff, in short, is as follows: The plaintiff, who is the sole proprietor of M/s Kilito Ore Carriers, had obtained a barge by name 'M.V. Vinayak' under lease from M/s. Tolani Shipping Limited, Bombay and the same was plied for transportation a...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »