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.
Tanoi Vs. State of Goa
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-05-2013
Oral Judgment: This revision is directed against the concurrent findings of the learned trial Magistrate and the Additional Sessions Judge holding the applicant guilty of offences punishable under Section 332 of the Penal Code. 2. The facts which are material for deciding this appeal are as under: On 29/12/2008 at about 6.45 p.m., PW1 Head Constable Ravindra Khorate, buckle no.3501 claims to have been posted at duty at the spot. The applicant took exception to parking of a car possibly on the road. Head Constable Ravindra Khorate claims to have told the applicant that the car belonged to some Karnataka Minister and that it would move away as soon as the occupants alighted from the car. However, the applicant was not satisfied with the reply and hit the Head Constable with a key chain in his hand resulting in an abrasion on the victim's cheek. Other police men were informed and the applicant was taken to police station along with the Head Constable. The Head Constable was referred for m...
Mrs. Maria Sylvia Cardozo E Fernandes and Another Vs. Mrs. Savita Tina ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-02-2013
Oral Order:- Heard Shri C. A. Coutinho, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Shri N. Sardessai, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 3 and 4. 2. The above Writ Petition challenges an order passed by the lower appellate Court whereby an injunction granted in favour of the petitioners by the learned Trial Judge restraining the respondent nos. 3 and 4 from alienating and/or creating any third party right in respect of the suit property was set aside and the application for temporary injunction filed by the petitioners came to be rejected. 3. Mr. Coutinho, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has assailed the impugned order on the ground that as per the case of the petitioners, the total consideration in respect of the subject matter of the sale deed in favour of the respondent no. 1 and 2 dated 9th March, 2006 was in fact paid by the petitioners. The learned counsel further pointed out that a bare perusal of the sale deed, clearly discloses that the cheq...
Varun Resorts Ltd. Vs. Pan Electrical Services and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-01-2013
Oral Judgment: This appeal questions the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Mapusa whereby he dismissed the suit for want of jurisdiction. 2. The plaintiff/ appellant had filed a suit against the respondent/ defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.12 Lakhs with interest. According to the plaintiff, the plaintiff had placed an order for delivery of Diesel Generating set ('D.G. set' for short) to the defendant some time in the year 2006. This D.G. set was delivered and also commissioned by the defendant. It was then suggested that the plaintiff may go for another D.G. set and, therefore, an order for another D.G. set was placed and as desired by the defendant, full payment of Rs.12 Lakhs was made by a cheque drawn on bank at Mumbai. The defendant has its place of business at Mumbai. This D.G. set was not delivered and, therefore, the plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of money which has been paid towards delivery of this D.G. set. 3. The defendant appe...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›