Mumbai Goa Court January 2014 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.
Vallabh Vaman Bhobe Vs. the State, Through the Police Inspector and An ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The present petition is filed under Articles 226 and 277 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. to challenge the order made by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, FTC, North Goa in Criminal Revision Application No.82/2012. The Learned Addl. Sessions Judge has made the order on the application filed at Exhibit 9 and has directed to ascertain as to whether the properties mentioned in the application by the petitioner from Revision Application no.82/2012 are present in the sealed premises and to conduct proper inventory accordingly. 4. The petitioner is the father of respondent no.2. There is dispute over a shop premises. It is the case of the petitioner that the property in dispute was taken on rent basis by his father and the petitioner became tenant of the premises after the death of his father which took place in the year 1974. It is the case of the petitioner that he is doing his...
M/S. Kadamba Transport Corporation Ltd. Vs. Kamlakant Halarnkar
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
Oral Judgment: By order dated 25/10/2013, this Court had directed to issue notice to the respondent indicating that the petition may be heard and disposed of finally at the stage of admission. The respondent has been duly served with the notice and since he was absent on 18/12/2013 when the matter was called out, an opportunity was given to him to appear today. However, the respondent is absent. 2. Heard Mr. Dessai, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 3. By this petition, filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 04/02/2013 passed by the Industrial Tribunal and Labour Court at Panaji ('Trial Court'), in Case No. C-IT/13/2011. 4. The respondent is working as a conductor for the petitioner and having badge No. 5401 and posted at Vasco depot. Industrial Proceedings under No. IT/54/07 were pending before the Trial Court on the issue of legality of withholding of two increments of the respondent on account of irreg...
Rajesh BIn Vs. State, Through Public Prosecutor.
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
Smt. R.S. Dalvi, J. 1. This appeal is filed against the conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC, read with Section 8 of the Goa Children's Act, 2003. The accused-appellant was known to the victim He was her neighbour. He lived close by. The victim is stated to be partially mentally deficient. The victim girl was a minor. The appellant is stated to have taken the victim to his house, which was close to the house of the victim, for committing the aforesaid offence. The victim was not found in the house, upon which her mother caused search to be made. Her brother went to search for the victim. He banged on the door of the appellant and found the victim. The victim was injured. The victim was crying. The mother was shocked to see that her daughter was injured. She was enraged and shouted for help. She reported the incident to the police. 2. The mother has been examined as Complainant. Her brother is also examined to corroborate what transpired when h...
Subray Narayan Prabhu Dessai and Another Vs. Government of Goa, Throug ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-20-2014
The appeal is filed against the Judgment and decree of Special Civil Suit No.66/1997/(old) which was pending in the Court Civil Judge, Senior Division, Quepem. The suit filed by the appellant was for declaration of his title in respect of agricultural lands, to give survey numbers to the suit property, for setting aside the record of the revenue survey made in favour of the respondent and for relief of injunction is dismissed by the trial court. Both the sides are heard. 2. In short, the facts leading to the institution of the appeal can be stated as follows: The suit was filed in respect of the area of 2,02,000 square metres from survey no.62/0 and survey no.65/1 situated in village Rivona, South Goa. It is the case of the appellants/plaintiffs that agricultural land which was known as œ Predio Rustico Demominado Borodo Poiquim Pandouaglle or Pandousoddo? and which was registered in the office of Registrar of Sanguem at serial no.25813 from village Rivona, South Goa was owned by...
Bhukant Prabhu Vs. Ajay Guno Kerkar and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-18-2014
Oral Judgment: The appeal is filed against judgment and award of Claim Petition No.318/2003 which was pending before the MACT, South Goa, Margao. The petition filed by appellant is dismissed by the Tribunal. Both the sides are heard. 2. In short, the facts leading to the institution of the appeal can be stated as follows: The claimant is a transporter. On 25/04/2003, the claimant collected 12,000 kilo litres of diesel from Hindustan Petroleum Ltd. in the truck standing in the name of his wife and it was to be delivered at Gokak, Karnataka. The number of the truck was GA-02-T-8138. The accident took place at a place known as Durginim Mollem situated at NH-4A within jurisdiction of Mollem Police Station, Sanguem Taluka at about 14.40 hrs. It is the case of the claimant that truck bearing no.GA-01-W-6099 gave dash to the truck tanker of the claimant and the accident was caused by the driver of the truck bearing no.GA-01-W-6099 by driving the truck rashly and negligently. It is contended t...
Pedro Do Rosario Fernandes Alias Pedro Antonio Miguel Fernandes Vs. Wi ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Shri J. E. Coelho Pereira, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Appellant and Shri Coutinho, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent no. 1. 2. The above Appeal came to be admitted by an Order dated 16.07.2010 on the following substantial questions of law : 1. Whether the Lower Appellate Court has misconstrued the provisions of the Limitation Act of Article 58 to the effect that the suit for declaration of title is barred by the law of limitation when there was no claim of adverse possession raised by the Respondents herein? 2. Whether the findings of the Lower Appellate Court to the effect that the Appellants have failed to identify the suit property are perverse in view of the fact that the contents of Para 1 and 2 of the plaint have not been denied by the Respondents in their written statement? 3. Whilst dealing with the first substantial question of law, Shri J. E. Coelho Pereira, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Appellant, has taken me throu...
T.V.P. Bhaskar Rao Vs. M/S. Susheela Homes and Properties Private Ltd. ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
Heard Shri S. Kamat Malyekar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Shri C. Mascarenhas, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, heard forthwith. 3. By this petition, the petitioner, who is the plaintiff in Regular Civil Suit No. 73/2010/B, pending before the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, 'B' Court, Vasco-da-Gama (Trial Court, for short), has challenged the order dated 20/04/2012 passed by the Trial Court in the said suit whereby the application for amendment of the plaint filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. 4. The facts relevant for the purpose of the disposal of this petition are as follows: The petitioner has filed the said suit for specific performance of contract, injunction and other reliefs. In the plaint, inter alia, the petitioner has averred that he had paid to the respondent no.1 an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rs. three lacs only) as part consideration for purchase of the su...
Devappa Laxman Gaunkar and Others Vs. Balkrishna Nilu Gaunkar and Othe ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr. R. G. Ramani, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, Mr. Sudesh Usgaonkar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos.1(A) to 1(L) and Mr. P. Kamat, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 5(a) and 5(b). 2. The above appeal came to be admitted by an order dated 07.01.2009 on the following substantial questions of law: (1) Whether the Trial Court fell in error in holding that the plaint did not disclose the cause of action? (2) Whether the Trial Court fell in error in holding that the suit was barred by limitation particularly, when the appellants were claiming only declaration and not possession? 3. During the course of the hearing of the above appeal, Mr. Ramani, learned counsel appearing for the appellants has pointed out that an additional substantial question of law needs to be framed which is as under: œWhen the plaintiffs' case was that the plaintiffs were the owners and in possession of the suit property, the learned Lower...
Soiru Keshav Porob Sawkar Vs. Navdurga Devasthan Borim and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. The above Appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law : a) Whether the Judgments of the Courts below are vitiated on account of non-consideration of documentary evidence namely PW1/K being acknowledgment of Appellant's right in respect of Survey no. 2/6 by Respondent no. 1/Defendant no. 1? b) Whether the Appellate Court was right in holding that the Appellant has not led evidence to rebut presumption arise under Section 105 of Land Revenue Code about the entries in the occupants column of record of rights in Form I and XIV? c) Whether the Appellate Court was right in dismissing the application to produce additional documents without first hearing the appeal on merits? d) Whether the Appellate Court should have heard the application for production of additional documents at the time of hearing the appeal on merits as held by the Apex Court in the case of State of Rajasthan vs. T. N. Sahani and Ors. (2001 (10) SCC 619)? 2. Heard Shri Sudesh Usgaonka...
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Miss Clancy Arcanjia Dias and Oth ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
The appeal is filed against the judgment and award of Claim Petition No.86/2000 which was pending before MACT, Salcete, Margao. Both the sides are heard. 2. During arguments, the learned Counsel for appellant submitted that original respondent no.5, The United India Assurance Company Ltd. was liable to pay the compensation as the vehicle was insured by the owner with this Insurance Company and if it is found that respondent no.2 from the Claim Petition was wrongly deleted, the matter be remanded back. Other side was heard on this point also. Learned Counsel for original respondent no.3, the dealer of the vehicle supported the appellant on the aforesaid point. 3. In short, the facts leading to the institution of the appeal can be stated as follows: The accident took place on 2/03/2000. One Mahindra jeep bearing Temporary Registration No.MH-15-TRE-969 gave dash to the motorcycle of deceased Jose A. Dias, who was aged about 39 years. Jose A. Dias died in the accident. The Claim Petition w...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »