Mumbai Goa Court August 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. Neeta Bhalchandra Kalghatgi and Others Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
Oral Judgment: This appeal by the plaintiffs is directed against the decree of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Vasco-da-Gama refusing interest on the sum of Rs.11,55,433.42 which the learned Judge ordered the defendants to pay to the plaintiffs. 2. The facts, which are material for deciding this appeal are mostly not in dispute or cannot be disputed. 3. There was Special Civil Suit No.157/1982 between the brothers and daughters of Narhari Narvekar. The defendants in that suit, are the plaintiffs in the present suit. In that suit, a receiver was appointed. Initially, Advocate Shirsat was appointed as receiver. Thereafter, Advocate Surendra Dessai was appointed in his place and lastly, Shri Sandesh Naik was appointed as receiver. These receivers maintained a current account with the defendant State Bank of India in which a sum of Rs.11,55,453.42 was lying. The parties filed consent terms in the said suit and the suit was decreed in accordance with those consent terms. The plaintiff...
Mrs. Catrina Fernandes E Gomes Vs. Anand Sudhir and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Mr. R. Gawthankar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. V. G. P. Dukle, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents no.1 and 2. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 22/08/2006 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Margao, in Claims Petition No.39/2003. 3. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the manner in which their names appear in the cause title of the said claim petition. 4. The claimant had filed the said petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, (The Act,, for short), claiming total compensation of Rs.3,00,000 lakhs on account of the death of their son, namely, Hanil Ernest Magmel Gomes, in a motor vehicular accident. 5. The case of the claimants, in short, was as follows; On 24/11/2001, at about 4.00p.m., the said Hanil (since deceased) was returning home to Panjorconi Cuncolim from Margao by a Maruti Van bearing no.GA-02/A-4735. The r...
Sanjay Fondu Bhandare Vs. Narayan Babuso Palyekar and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
Oral Judgment: This appeal is directed against the Judgment and Award dated 22/03/2007 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panaji in Claim Petition No. 92/1999. 2. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the manner in which their names appear in the cause title of the said Claim Petition. 3. The claimant had filed the said petition under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act, for short) for grant of total compensation of Rs. 50,000/- on account of injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicular accident. 4. The case of the claimant, in short, was as follows: On 10/7/1998, at about 6.00 a.m while he was proceeding from Merces towards Panaji on his scooter bearing no. GA-01/A-5740, the respondent no.1 was driving the trax jeep bearing registration number GA-02/C-7098 ahead of the scooter and suddenly the respondent no.1 took a right turn and in that process dashed against the scooter of the claimant thereby causing injuries resul...
State Through P.i., Verna Police Station Vs. Kamlesh Kumar Bind
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
Oral Judgment : This appeal is directed against judgment of the learned JMFC, 'C' court, Vasco da Gama acquitting the respondent for offences punishable under Section 279, 337 and 304-A of the Penal Code, while the learned JMFC convicted the respondent for offence punishable under Section 134 (a) and (b) of the Motor Vehicles Act. 2. Facts which led to filing of this appeal are as under: On 3/12/2008, PW6/Shri Eurico Santana D'Silva was travelling in his official car along with his wife from Panaji to Margao. The car was being driven by PW3/Vasu Gawas. When the car had reached a place near Toyoto showroom on the road, tanker no.GA-01-T-7272 driven by the respondent came from the opposite side and dashed against this car no.GA-03-G-8008. The victim i.e. the wife of PW6/Eurico D'Silva, was trapped in the car. Police were informed and with the help of fire brigade, she was rescued. Wife of PW6/Shri Eurico D'Silva however, had suffered serious injuries and succumbed to those injuries. PW6/...
Dilip Babasaheb Londhe and Others Vs. State Through P.P. and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
These two petitions questioning continuance of two separate criminal cases against the petitioners' newspapers are being disposed of by this common judgment because of the common question of law involved, though facts giving rise to these petitions are different. 2. The petitioners in Writ Petition No.10/2011 are the Executive Editor and publishers of Marathi newspaper Pudhari. Before 22/11/2009, a meeting was held in Menezes Braganza Institution at Panaji. Advocate Govind Pansare the accused no.4 and Dr. Narendra Dabholkar- the accused no.5 in the complaint, addressed the said meeting. The petitioners' newspaper published this news on 22/11/2009. The news item refers to Sanatan Sanstha and reports that Advocate Govind Pansare stated that the institutions like Sanatan Sanstha were harming religion. Similar were the observations of Dr. Narendra Dabholkar reported in the petitioners' newspaper. 3. After this news item was published, on behalf of Sanatan Sanstha, Shri Virendra Pandurang ...
Raghunath R. P. Sawkar and Another Vs. Shailendra R. P. Dessai
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Mr. R. G. Ramani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Sudesh Usgaonkar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. The above petition challenges the judgment dated 16.05.2011 passed by the learned Administrative Tribunal in Tenancy Revision Application No.66/2004 and Misc. Appln. No.257/2004 whereby the revision preferred by the respondent was allowed and the judgment passed by the learned Mamlatdar dismissing the application filed by the respondent to declare him as tenant of the disputed property came to be set aside. The dispute hanging fire between the petitioners and the respondent for last four decades. It is the claim of the petitioners that the respondent is a caretaker of the disputed property which is surveyed under nos.428/3, 428/4, 408/1 and 420/1 of Village Shiroda in Ponda Taluka. The claim of the respondent is that he is the tenant of the disputed property. It is not in dispute that the disputed property is an areca nut garden...
Pandurang Tilu Gosavi Vs. Dy. Conservator of Forests and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
Oral Judgment: This appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 9th October, 2003 passed the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Quepem (trial Court) in Regular Civil Suit No. 18/91/A. 2. This appeal was initially filed before the District Judge, South Goa, Margao and registered as Regular Civil Appeal No 11/2005. However, the same was transferred from the District Court to this Court, on account of lack of jurisdiction in view of the Goa Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2005 and the same was forwarded to this Court along with original record and Proceedings. The appeal then came to be registered as First Appeal No. 304 of 2005. After the admission of the appeal, notice was issued to the appellant as well as to the respondents and both the parties were duly served. However, the respondents have chosen to remain absent. 3. Heard Mr. Sudesh Usgaonkar, learned Counsel for the appellant, who was the plaintiff before the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Quepem. 4. Parties sha...
State Vs. Manoj Pednekar and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
Oral Judgment: This appeal by the State questions acquittal of the respondents by the learned JMFC, 'B' Court, Mapusa for offence punishable under Sections 326 and 504 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code. 2. Facts which are material for deciding this appeal are as under: Victim Yeshwant Pednekar and respondent no.1 Manoj Pednekar are twins. The other three respondents i.e. Manisha Pednekar, Reshma Chodankar and Ramesh Chodankar are respectively wife of Manoj, sister and brother-in-law of Manisha. It is not in dispute that the brothers are goldsmiths and, therefore, use nitric acid in their work as goldsmiths. They reside in the same house and their relations are extremely strained. On 25/03/2007 at about 5.30 p.m. while the other three respondents i.e. Manisha, Reshma and Ramesh were holding Yeshwant Pednekar, Manoj Pednekar is alleged to have hit Yeshwant with the bottle of acid on head. Yeshwant suffered several acid burn injuries on his face, neck, chest and back. Respondent no.1...
Salvador D'Souza (since deceased) and Others Vs. Mrs. Maria Lizia Aure ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
Heard Mr. Bhobe, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and Ms. Linhares, the learned Additional Government Advocate, on behalf of the respondents no. 13 and 14. 2. The present appeal arises out of the Judgment, Order and Decree dated 12/01/2006 passed by the learned Adhoc Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court-I, South Goa, Margao (trial Court, for short) in Civil Suit No.176/2004 (new) : Regular Civil Suit No.79/2003/A(old). 3. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the manner in which their names appear in the cause title of the said civil suit. 4. The plaintiffs had filed the said suit for declaration that they are absolute owners in possession and enjoyment of the suit property and that the defendants have no right, title and interest in the suit property; for perpetual injunction restraining the defendants and their agents from constructing road on or over the suit property or from interfering with the same in any manner detrimental to the ownership a...
Atul Anant Pathak Vs. State Through Chandrakant L. Naik
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-14-2013
Oral Judgment : The petitioner in this petition has invited this trouble of being required to move this Court because he questioned before the Sessions Court an order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sattari in Criminal Case No.9/S/2011 issuing process against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of Indian Penal Code. 2. A sixteen and half years old girl was employed in a factory of which the petitioner was Factory Manager. It was alleged that the petitioner did not supply necessary safety equipments to the victim who was caught in a conveyor belt. She suffered injuries which led to her death. A report was made and after investigation, charge-sheet was sent to the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class Sattari, who issued process against the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner approached Court of Sessions at Mapusa for having the order of issuance of process set aside. 3. The learned Additional Sessions Judg...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »