Mumbai Goa Court March 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.
Lisa Rodrigues E Mendonca and Another Vs. Eugenio Rodrigues and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-11-2014
1. Heard Mr. Pereira, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and Mr. Sardessai, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents no. 1 and 2. 2. Admit. 3. Heard forthwith by consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. 4. By this appeal, the appellants take exception to the order dated 24/07/2013 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division at Vasco-da-Gama ('trial Court'), on the objections dated 27/07/2012 filed by the respondents no 1 and 2 herein, in Special Inventory Proceedings No. 11/2011/A. 5. Respondent no. 3 initiated the said Inventory Proceedings No.11/2011/A on account of the death of her parents namely Mr. Macario Rodrigues, who expired on 15/03/2009 and Mrs. Yolanda D'Silva Rodrigues, who expired on 08/03/2010. By order dated 13/01/2012, the said respondent no. 3 was appointed as Cabeca da Casal and she filed the list of assets dated 06/06/2012. Respondents no.1 and 2 filed their objections to the said list of assets thereby praying to exclude t...
M/S. Commonwealth Developers Cd Fountainhead, Represented by Its Partn ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-11-2014
F.M. Reis, J. The above appeal was fixed for final disposal on the following substantial questions of law by order dated 23.01.2014. 1. Whether the rear courtyard inclosed by walls of a residential unit could be included as built-up area of the residential unit ? 2. Whether the learned Tribunal can inquire into and get measured the courtyard which was not included in the built-up area and which is not the lis between the parties ? 2. We have heard Mr. Chythanya, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Ms. A. Desai, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant/assessee submitted its return of income declaring a total income of Rs.53,620/- on 30.10.2006. An order was passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act on 21.11.2008 on the returned income of Rs.53,620/-. Thereafter, CIT invoked its jurisdiction under Section 263 and set aside the order passed under Section 143(3) vide order dated 30.3.2011 with a direction to...
Dipak Desai and Others Vs. State Through Police Inspector, C.i.D. Crim ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-10-2014
Oral Order: 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. This common order shall dispose of the above three applications for bail filed by the applicants in Crime No.1/2014 registered with Canacona Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 336, 337, 338 and 304 of Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short), to which subsequently, the offences under Sections 120-B of IPC and Section 7 and 13(1) (a) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ('P.C. Act' for short) have been added. The applicant Dipak Desai, the Additional Collector-II, North Goa, Panaji, who was holding additional charge of Chief Officer of Canacona Municipal Council in addition to his regular post as Deputy Collector, at Canacona between January, 2010 to October, 2010 and Mr. Pradeep Naik, the Dy. Collector, who worked as Chief Officer, Canacona Municipal Council between September, 2011 to July, 2012 and again from December, 2012 to October, 2013 were arrested on 12/02/2014, whereas the applicant Prashan...
State of Goa, Through Its Chief Secretary, Secretariat and Others Vs. ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-07-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr. S. Dhargalkar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the appellants and Mr. P. Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. The above appeal challenges the judgment and award dated 31.01.2007 whereby a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (herein after referred to as "the said Act") came to be partly allowed and the compensation for the land acquired was fixed at the rate of Rs.105/- per square metre. 3. The learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the appellants has vehemently challenged the impugned judgment and pointed out that the Reference Court has gone on the wrong premise that the Land Acquisition Officer has offered compensation of Rs.61.41 per square metre when on the contrary the amount offered was Rs.40/- per square metre. The learned counsel further pointed out that the said error of the Reference Court is reflected while fixing the compensation for the land acquired at para 17 of the i...
Efigenio Dias and Another Vs. Joaquim Manuel Aries Gomes and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-07-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. This First Appeal arises out of the Judgment and Decree passed by the learned Trial Judge in Civil Suit no. 267/2004 on 27.12.2007, by which Civil Suit filed by the Appellants (original Plaintiffs) is dismissed. By the said Judgment, the learned Trial Judge has dismissed the counter claim filed by the defendants. The Original Plaintiffs have filed this Appeal. There is no challenge to the dismissal of the counter claim. 2. The basic facts which are necessary for the consideration of the issues are as follows: The Plaintiff claims that the six separate properties having Matriz no. 929, 930, 931, 932, 933 and 934, admeasuring 67200 square metres of survey no. 114/1 of Village Cavelossim, were joint piece of property. The Plaintiffs claim that they are the exclusive owners of Matriz no. 933. The Plaintiffs have given the details as to how they acquired the title in the suit property and have submitted that they are in peaceful and continuous possession of the suit proper...
Miss. Komal Singh and Another Vs. Inspector General, Prisons, Governme ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-06-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr. Menezes, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Amonkar, learned Public Prosecutor on behalf of the respondent. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent heard forthwith. 3. The present petition, filed by the sister and mother of the prisoner, for whom parole is sought, takes exception to the order dated 24/02/2014 passed by the respondent on an application dated 10/02/2014 thereby rejecting parole to the brother of the petitioner no. 1, on the ground that no emergent situation exists for granting parole. The petitioners have sought release of the said prisoner, Rajendra Singh on parole. Affidavit-in-reply has been filed by the respondent resisting the application. 4. It is seen that the prisoner namely Rajendra Singh, the brother of the petitioner no.1 and son of the petitioner no. 2, a life convict, was on furlough w.e.f. 16/01/2014 to 12/02/2014 for a period of 28 days. Unfortunately, during the said period of furlough i....
Sao Jose De Areal Villagers Union, Through Its President, Salvador Fer ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-06-2014
Oral Judgment: Heard Mr. Nigel Da Costa Frias,learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Mr. Y. V. Nadkarni, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.7. Mr. K. Noorani, learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for respondents no.1 to 3, 5 and 6 and Mr. R. Menezes, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.4. Rule. Heard forthwith. 2. The above Public Interest Litigation came to be filed seeking the following reliefs: a) For a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby quashing and setting aside the following judgments and orders passed by the respondent no.6. i) Judgment and order dated 4/3/2010 passed in Panchayat Appeal No.65/2009. ii) Judgment and order dated 15/04/2010 passed in Panchayat Appeal No.97/2009. iii) Judgement and order dated 15/10/2010 passed in Panchayat Appeal No.171/2009. iv) Judgment and order dated 8/7/2010 passed in Panchayat Appeal No.199/2009. b) For a writ of certiorari or a wri...
Shailesh Volvoikar Vs. State Represented by the Pp
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-06-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr. Bras De Sa, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Rivankar, learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent. 2. By this Revision Application, the petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 30/03/2012 passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge “ I, Panaji in Criminal Appeal No. 33 of 2012 and has prayed to acquit him of the offence with which he has been charged in Criminal Case No. 201/S/2010/A. 3. The petitioner is the accused in the said Criminal Case no. 201/S/2010/A whereas the respondent is the complainant. Parities shall hereinafter be referred to as per their status in the said Criminal Case. 4. The accused faced trial for offences punishable under Sections 279, 304-A and 337 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C., for short). The case of the prosecution, in short, was that: On 12/02/2010 at around 5.20 p.m. the accused drove Swaraj Mazda Pick Up bearing no. GA-02/U-5879 in a rash and negligent m...
Vishwanath Gaonkar Vs. State Through P.P.
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-06-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr. Shet, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mrs. Pinto, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent. 2. This appeal is directed against the part of the judgment and order dated 27/04/2012 and sentence dated 30/04/2012 by which the present appellant came to be held guilty of the offence punishable under Section 3 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and ordered to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default, to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for one month. The period of detention already undergone by the accused appellant was set off under Section 428 of Cr.P.C. 3. The appellant was accused no.1 in Sessions Case No. 17/2009 and he shall, hereinafter, be referred to as accused no.1. Accused no.1 along with accused no.2 namely Nandkishore Naik was charge sheeted by Churchorem Police Station before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sanguem for offence p...
Deputy Collector and (L.A) and Another Vs. Desiderio Rafael De Piedade ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-06-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. The appeal arises out of the Judgment and Award passed by the learned District Judge (II), South Goa, Margao, by which the learned Judge has decided the reference and granted compensation to the original claimants at the rate of Rs.1265/- per square metre along with all the statutory benefits under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (The Act, for short). 2. The appeal is filed by the Deputy Collector and Land Acquisition Officer (L.A.O), Margao and the Executive Engineer, Works Division VI (R and B) P.W.D., Fatorda, Goa. 3. The original claimants have also filed Cross Objection which is registered as Cross Objection No.4 of 2009. 4. Heard Shri S. Vahidulla, learned Government Advocate for the Appellants and Shri A. F. Diniz, learned counsel for the respondents (original claimants). I have seen the record with the assistance of the learned counsel. 5. The relevant facts are as follows: The Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published in the offici...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »