Mumbai Goa Court February 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.
Farzana Ansari Vs. Abid Ali Ansari
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-24-2014
Oral Judgment: Rule. With the consent of the parties made returnable forthwith. 2. This Criminal revision is directed against the Judgment and order dated 19/11/2013 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-II, South Goa, Margao in Criminal Revision Application No. 29/2012 . The applicant/wife has filed application under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code before the Judicial Magistrate First Class for maintenance bearing No.2/M/2011/C. The said maintenance application was allowed after recording the evidence of the applicant/wife and her father and the respondent was directed to pay maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month on or before every 7th day of every month. Being aggrieved by the said order, the respondent/husband filed criminal revision before the learned Sessions Judge and the learned Sessions Judge allowed the said revision and quashed and set aside the order of maintenance passed by the learned JMFC. Hence, this criminal revision application. 3. The marriage between...
Tulsidas Atmaram Shirodkar Alias Narvekar, (Since Deceased) and Others ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-21-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Shri S. D. Lotlikar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Appellants and Shri Bhobe, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent. 2. The above Appeal came to be admitted on the following substantial question of law by Order dated 06.01.2010: i) Whether the learned First Appellate Judge District Judge-I, Panaji, erred in holding that the respondent/defendants had inherited the tenancy right in respect of suit shop as legal heirs of deceased late Sakharam Bhikaro Naik and as such could not be evicted from the suit premises on the basis of the pleadings of the defendants that they are tenants of the suit premises in their own right without spelling out the facts indicating the inheritance of the tenancy right? ii) Whether the first appellate Court misdirected itself in concluding that the tenancy was commercial on the basis of the facts that the premises were let out for business purpose and not on the basis of user of the said premises? 3. Briefly, the facts ...
Alizar Pereira Vs. the State of Goa, Through the Police Inspector
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-21-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 9/01/2012 passed by the President, Children's Court for State of Goa, thereby convicting the appellant/accused under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 8(2) of the Goa Children's Act, 2003. The learned President has sentenced the appellant/accused to undergo imprisonment of 6 months under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and imposed fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo imprisonment for 10 days and under Section 8(2) of the Act, he was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of two years and pay statutory fine of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac only), in default, to undergo imprisonment for a period of 6 months. She also ordered that the fine imposed shall be paid as a compensation to the victim in terms of Section 357 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 2. It is the case of the prosecution that victim was residing with her family consisting of her cousin, her father and was the n...
Aivy De Souza Faria and Others Vs. Alvaro De Souza Faria, Through His ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-21-2014
Heard Mr. Almeida, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. M. B. D'Costa, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.1. 2. Learned Counsel for both the parties submitted that the appellants and respondent no. 1 are the only contesting parties and that the respondents no. 2 and 3 were absent before the lower Courts. They submitted that the matter be disposed of finally at the stage of admission itself. 3. By this petition, the petitioners have taken exception to the order dated 15/07/2013 passed by the District Judge“II, South Goa, Margao (First Appellate Court) in Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 27/2010. 4. Facts relevant for disposal of the petition are as under: Inventory proceedings No. 19036/78/II were instituted in order to partition the inheritance of Amancio Sebastiao Aleixo Roque de Pilar de Souza and his wife Maria Josefina Aquavia Martinha Faria. These proceedings were initiated on 27/01/1978. Their daughter Maria Lira de ...
Shubangi Apa Dhuri, Daughter of Late Panduranga Moraskar, (Since Decea ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-21-2014
1. The appellants sued for exercising their right of pre-emption against the respondents. The suit came to be dismissed, inter alia, on the ground that it was barred by the law of limitation. An appeal therefrom has been dismissed. In this second appeal, two substantial questions of law with regard to the period of limitation and implied repeal of the limitation, specifying period of limitation are framed, which are as under: a) Whether in a suit for pre-emption, the limitation period is governed by Article 1566 of Portuguese Civil Code or Article 97 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963? b) Whether in view of Indian Limitation Act, 1963 which applies to the State of Goa and prescribes a period of limitation for a suit to enforce the right of pre-emption that part of Article 1566 prescribing a shorter period of limitation stands repealed? The aforesaid questions may be considered together. The other issues, on facts, have resulted in concurrent findings of fact, which need not be gone into in...
Milagrina Dias and Others Vs. the Sanguem Municipal Council
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-21-2014
Oral Judgment:- 1. Heard Mr. T. Pereira, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. V. P. Thali, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. The above appeal came to be admitted by order dated 02.07.2010 on the following substantial questions of law. (a) Whether on the basis of the admission of the respondent that the appellants have been granted an aforamento the consequences available for an aforamento as provided under the Portuguese Civil Code are available to the appellant? (b) Whether the First Appellate Court was justified in dismissing the suit in toto though the appellants were held to be in lawful possession of the suit property? 3. Mr. T. Pereira, learned counsel appearing for the appellants has assailed the impugned judgment on the ground that the appellants have been granted an aforamento in the year 1932 for the purpose of cultivation and putting up a construction therein by the respondent and according to him the appellants are in possession of the said por...
Shantu Sazu Bhonsle and Others Vs. Saraswati Sadashiv Tari, Since Dece ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-21-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Shri S. D. Lotlikar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Appellants and Shri Mulgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents. 2. The above Appeal came to be admitted by an Order dated 25.06.2010, on the following substantial questions of law: (i) Whether in a suit for injunction simpliciter, the finding of possession recorded by the Courts below in favour of the Respondents, is perverse having been rendered. (ii) On the wrong assumption that name of plaintiff no. 1 alone is recorded in the survey records when in fact the names of large number of persons are entered herein as occupants. (iii) Contrary to the admissions that there are other co-owners of the said property surveyed under no. 40/3, with large number of houses located therein, a position duly corroborated by survey plan. (iv) Contrary the admission made by the Plaintiff no. 2 (Pw.1), to the effect that the defendants were having their residential house in the suit property surveyed unde...
Vishal Agarwal Vs. State of Goa, Through Public Prosecutor and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-20-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. With the consent of the parties made returnable forthwith. 2. This petition is directed against the order dated 23/2/2012 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mapusa and the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class on 14/10/2011 disallowing the application of the petitioner for compounding the offence punishable under section 279 of the I.P.C. The petitioner was driving the vehicle Zen on 7/1/2010 at Agacaim and due to his rash driving dashed one mini bus on its front side and thereby caused damage to the bus and the petitioner who was the driver of the zen also got injured. Except the petitioner, none was injured. Police registered offence against the petitioner. He was charge sheeted and now he is facing a Criminal Case No. I.P.C/S/143/10/C before the JMFC, at Panaji. The petitioner got injured himself and filed an application for getting the offence compoundable before the learned JMFC. The Magistrate after considering the provi...
Shripad Kulkarni and Others Vs. State of Goa, Through the Police Inspe ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-20-2014
R.S. Dalvi, J. 1. Rule. Made returnable forthwith. 2. This Writ Petition is filed by the Management Personnel of a limited Company against the State and their Employees. Respondent no. 2 served as Manager, Human Resources. She claimed leave on personal grounds. She was not allowed. She was called to office on the date of the incident. She claimed that she was handed over a resignation letter to sign which she was coerced to do. She has lodged a criminal complaint on 23.5.2013 against the petitioners herein for the offences under Sections 342 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. It is the case of the petitioners that no cognizable offence is disclosed in the complaint. It is her case that it is clearly and apparently disclosed. Upon that complaint the FIR has been registered and investigation has proceeded. The investigation is essentially in terms of the statements of several persons of the company as witnesses. About eight such statements are recorded, seven of wh...
imelda D' Souza and Others Vs. State of Goa, through Chief Secretary a ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-20-2014
Oral Judgment: (R.S. Dalvi, J.) 1. The Petitioners, who are the heirs and legal representatives of the original Petitioner, seek to quash Orders dated 24.04.2005 and 06.12.2005, being the Orders in Appeal and dismissal of the deceased wife of Petitioner no. 1-A. The original Petitioner, the deceased wife of Respondent No.1A, was serving as a cashier in Government Higher Secondary School, Lyceum, Panaji. She was initially placed under suspension pending a departmental inquiry. The departmental inquiry has resulted in her dismissal, and which has been confirmed in appeal. 2. The Petitioners claim that the inquiry has been conducted by an incompetent officer. The Respondents have shown the issue of Notification dated 01.12.2003 by the Additional Director/Vigilance in the name of the Governor of Goa specifying the Deputy Director (Adm) Education Department as the Adhoc Disciplinary Authority to conduct the inquiry against deceased wife of Petitioner no. 1-A. This Notification has been issu...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »