Mumbai Goa Court September 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.
Shaikh Hidayat Vs. Maria Elvina Das Neves Fereira Trindade and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-04-2014
1. This appeal arises out of the judgment and decree passed by the learned 3rd Additional Civil Judge Senior Division at Margao in Special Civil Suit No.181/96/III on 30th April, 2008 by which the civil suit filed by the original plaintiff praying for specific performance, is dismissed with costs. 2. The case of the plaintiff is that:- The plaintiff filed the suit praying for decree for specific performance of the agreement in respect of the property admeasuring about 11920 Sq. Mtrs. surveyed under chalta No.20 of PT Sheet No.133 known as Palmar E Varzea Natibata situated at Borda of Margao. The plaintiff prayed for the decree for specific performance of the agreement in respect of the above mentioned property along with the areas reserved for two mundkars. The plaintiff prayed for the decree for specific performance in respect of the suit property against all the defendants. By way of an amendment, the plaintiff made alternative prayer and submitted that if the Court comes to the conc...
HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. Amresh Madhukar Sawant and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-03-2014
1. Heard Mr. Viegas, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. C. Fonseca, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 30/7/2010 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Panaji (J.M.F.C., for short) in Other Act Criminal Case No. 358/2008/B. 3. The appellant was the complainant in the said criminal case whereas respondent no.1 was the accused therein. Parties shall be hereinafter be referred to as per their status in the said case. 4. The complainant had filed the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (the Act) against the accused alleging that three cheques bearing nos. 009996 dated 1/10/2007, 009997 dated 1/11/2007 and 009998 dated 1/12/2007, all drawn on the Centurion Bank of Punjab ltd., Mapusa Branch, Goa, for Rs. 15,266/- (` fifteen thousand two hundred and sixty six only) each, were issued by the accused towards discharge of part of his loan liability and when these cheques were pr...
Madhukar B. Kunkalienkar, Accountant and Others Vs. State of Goa, thro ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-02-2014
Oral Judgment: (B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.) 1. This Court has today decided Writ Petitions no.243 of 2006, 326 of 2006 and 336 of 2006. There the question was whether wage revision given to cadre of Mamlatdar/ Joint Mamlatdar/B.D.O etc. was by way of interim arrangement or in recognition of grievance of anomaly. In the light of the Judgment dated 29/7/2003 delivered in Writ Petition No.205/1999 and other connected matters this Court has found that the said revision was in fact substitution of earlier pay scale and therefore not interlocutory or interim in nature. 2. Here the petitioners have been recruited after advertisement dated 11/10/1996. That advertisement prescribed pay scale of Rs.1600-50-2300-EB-60-2660 for the post of Accountant. Petitioners have received offer of appointment mentioning the very same pay scale and they have been appointed on 15/5/1997 in that pay scale only. 3. When 5th wage revision came to be implemented petitioners expected their placement in pay scale of Rs.5...
Upasana Majgaonkar and Others Vs. State of Goa, through its Chief Secr ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-02-2014
Oral Judgment:(B.P. Dharmadhikar, J.) 1. After the Court Orders dated 29.07.2003, deciding Writ Petition No. 205 of 1999 and Writ Petition no. 357 of 1999, the Mamlatdars working with State of Goa, have filed these Petitions for the direction to State Government to extend to them benefit of pay scale of Rs.6500-200-10500 in terms of recommendation of Fifth Pay Commission w.e.f. 01.01.1996 along with seven other Officers belonging to that cadre and on same terms as per Order dated 08.10.2003 and 27.03.2006. 2. Learned Addl. Government Pleader appearing for the Respondents, has at the threshold, pointed out that earlier bench after hearing the arguments had adjourned the matter to enable the State Government to take appropriate decision. He submitted that very same Bench while deciding similar issue in Writ Petition nos. 322 of 1998 and 138 of 1999 on previous day, had taken a different view. He, therefore, sought adjournment. However, his request was rejected. 3. In the background of ab...
Kamrudin J. Mavany, Since deceased, through L.R.s. and Others Vs. Tajd ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-01-2014
1. Oral Judgment: Heard Mr. Usgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants. None present for the respondents though they have been duly served. 2. By this review application, the applicants have sought review of the order dated 30.03.1998 passed by this Court (Coram: R. K. Batta, J.) in Appeal From Order No. 90 of 1992. In the said Appeal from Order, the order dated 05.03.1992 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division in Inventory Proceedings No. 19213 of 1980/A was challenged. 3. An application dated 03.03.1986 was filed in the said inventory proceedings by Smt. Gulshan Aziz Cassum and her husband Shri Aziz Cassum (respondents no. 2 and 3), inter-alia, alleging that by deed dated 27.05.1960, Khatijabai sold to a society named Society Per Quotas, formed by her sons, a property known as 'Udego' or 'Mestabata' described in the land registration office under No. 9757 and that this property should be enlisted in the inventory proceedings since the said sale deed ...
M/s Kayco Engineering, Engineering and Contractor and Another Vs. Stat ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-01-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr. Usgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and Mr. Rodrigues, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of respondent no. 1. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 30/12/2002 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bicholim (trial Judge) in Special Civil Suit No. 4/1993/A. 3. The appellants and respondents no. 2 to 6 were the defendants and respondent no. 1 was the plaintiff in the said suit. Parties shall, hereinafter, be referred to as per their status in the said suit. 4. The plaintiff had filed the said suit against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,32,781/- together with interest at the rate of 12.5 % from the date of filing of the suit till final payment. Case of the plaintiffs was as follows:- The defendants no. 2 to 8 are the partners of the defendant no. 1. On 01/12/1983, the plaintiff had invited item rate tender and contract for construction of right bank main...
Raju Bihari @ Rajesh Kumar Patel Vs. State of Goa, Through the Chief S ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-01-2014
Oral Judgment: (B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.) 1. The prisoner Raju Bihari, has approached this Court with a grievance that as immediate steps are not taken on request for furlough and parole, the occasion lapses and legal right of prisoner is defeated. 2. Learned Advocate Shri John Lobo, (appointed under the Legal Aid Services) argues that though furlough may not technically lapse, in case of exigencies like serious illness or death in the family, if parole application is not granted immediately, the occasion is over and the Petitioner therefore cannot attend to any ailment of the relative or the funeral, etc. Learned Counsel has taken the Court through relevant provisions and submitted that this Court must therefore intervene and lay down a time limit. He further submits that earlier time limit of eight weeks granted by this Court is being used to the prejudice of prisoners. According to him, when reports are called for from concerned Police Station and those reports are not received, as de...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›