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.
The Deputy Collector and S. D.O., Land Acquisition Officer and Another ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-05-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Ms. Susan Linhares, learned Additional Government Advocate for the Appellants and Mr. Sudin Usgaonkar, learned Counsel for the Respondents. 2. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 12/09/2005 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Margao (Reference Court, for short) in Land Acquisition Case No. 61/2004. 3. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the manner in which they appear in the cause title of the said L.A.C. No. 61/2004. The appellants are the legal representatives of original applicant. 4. Vide preliminary notification published under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (L.A. Act, for short), in the official gazette dated 2/8/2001, the Government proposed to acquire land for development of swimming pool and Multipurpose Sports Complex at Chaudi, Canacona. That included an area of 113 square metres from survey no. 62/1 (part) of village Chaudi. By award dated 21/11/2003, the Land Acquisition Officer (...
Yoshita R. Rivankar and Her Husband and Others Vs. Mrs. Sunita Haldank ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-05-2013
By this Second Appeal, the appellants take exception to the judgment and decree dated 8th December, 2003 passed by Additional District Judge, FTC, South Goa, Margao in Regular Civil Appeal No. 158/2001 by which the appeal preferred by the appellants against the judgment and decree dated 27th September, 2001 passed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Margao in Regular Civil Suit No. 14/1978/C, has been dismissed. 2. The appellant nos. 1 to 10 are legal representatives of original plaintiff Vaicunta Anant Bandodkar and appellant no.11 was plaintiff no. 2 in the above suit. The respondents are legal representatives of original defendants i.e. Shankar Anant Bandodkar, and his wife Sogunabai Shankar Bandodkar. The plaintiff no.1 was brother of defendant no.1. 3. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to as per their status before the trial Court. 4. The Plaintiffs filed the above suit seeking recovery of possession of suit premises situated at Aquem-Alto claiming title to it by deed...
Sitaram Damodar Sinai Desai Vs. Rajendra Vassudev Deshprabhu, R/O Pern ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-05-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. This Common Judgment shall dispose of both the above appeals since they pertain to the acquisition of the portions of the same property, vide the same notification. 3. The land was acquired for construction of bus stand at Pernem. This acquisition included an area of 3200 square metres of land from survey no. 3/2 of village Pernem and an area of 4570 square metres of land from survey no. 2/1 of the same village. By award dated 30/12/1992 passed under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (L. A. Act, for short) compensation of Rs. 45,295/- was awarded for the acquired land from survey no. 3/2 whereas compensation of Rs. 1,44,059/- was awarded for acquired land from survey no. 2/1. Since there was dispute regarding apportionment of the compensation, separate references under Section 30 of the L. A. Act, for survey nos. 3/2 and 2/1 were made by the Land Acquisition Officer. The Land Acquisition Case No. 160 of 1996 pertained ...
Krishna Dhakhu Pilernekar Vs. Scrutiny Committee for Verification of C ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-04-2013
A.P. Lavande, J. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent of learned Counsel for the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: (a) Issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the Order dated 8.01.2013 passed by the Respondent No.1; (b) Issue a direction to quash and set aside the Caste Certificate dated 11.04.2012 and Caste Validity Certificate in favour of the Respondent No.4 as belonging to OBC; (bb) to declare that the Notification dated 1.03.2013 is prospective in nature and consequently validity of the Caste Certificate issued by the Respondent No.3 in favour of the Respondent No.4 be valid from the date of the said Notification i.e. 1.03.2013 and not prior to the date of passing of the said above Notification; 3. Briefly, the case of the petitioner is as under: The petitioner contested the election of Village Panchayat, Merces from Ward No...
Vinod Kumar Sharma Vs. Mrs. Tereza Dinesh Vaghela and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-02-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Shri V.R. Tamba, the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and Shri M.B. Da Costa, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent no.1. None for respondent no.2, though served. 2. The above appeal challenges an award passed by the sole Arbitrator dated 2/03/2005 as well as the judgment and order dated 30/04/2009 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, North Goa at Panaji in Civil Miscellaneous Application No.100/2007. 3. Briefly the facts of the case as stated by the appellant are that the appellant and respondents executed an Arbitration Agreement on 27/03/1997 in terms of clause 15 of the Partnership Deed thereby inter alia appointing Shri Himmatbhai Joshi as the sole Arbitrator to decide the differences between the parties. The learned Arbitrator passed an award on 28/03/1999 inter alia deciding the differences raised by the parties before the said Arbitrator. Thereafter by notice dated 2/02/2002, the appellant called upon the respondents to d...
Mahanand Naik, S/O. Ramnath Naik Vs. State Through P.P. High Court
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-01-2013
U.V. Bakre, J. Heard Mr. Naik, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Ms. Pinto, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor (APP), on behalf of the State. 2. This appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 30th May, 2011/10th June, 2011 passed by learned Sessions Judge, North Goa, Panaji in Sessions Case No. 44/2009. 3. The said Sessions Case No. 44/2009 was a culmination of charge-sheet filed by Agacaim Police against the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the accused) for offences punishable under Sections 364, 302, 392 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code( I.P.C.) 4. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the accused had befriended the victim and on 24th October, 2007 at about 08.30 hours had abducted her on the false pretext of getting married to her and had taken her behind the Goa University Library in an isolated place and killed her by strangulating her with the dupatta worn by her and had robbed her gold ornaments namely two gold bangles, one smal...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›