Mumbai Goa Court October 2015 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.
Manguesh Rajaram Wagle and Another Vs. Suresh D. Naik and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-30-2015
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondents waives service. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioners who are original plaintiff nos.2(a) and 2(b) are challenging the order dated 31/08/2015 passed by the learned Civil Judge Junior Division, Panaji, in Regular Civil Suit No.279/2000/D. By the impugned order, application at Exhibit 193 filed by the petitioners to produce additional documents has been rejected. 3. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the petition may be stated thus: That the petitioners along with respondent nos.3 to 12 are the co-plaintiffs in Regular Civil Suit No.279/2000/D (old Special Civil Suit No.5/1992/A). The case made out in the plaint is that the plaintiffs are tenants in possession of a portion forming part of building known as Yasin Manzil? situated at St. Inez, Panaji, which is surveyed under chalta no.126 of PT sheet no.66. It is contended that the original defendant...
Smita Khaunte Vs. Police Inspector, Panaji Town Police Station and Ano ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-29-2015
K.L. Wadane, J. 1. The present Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to quash and set aside the first information report dated 7.8.2014 lodged by the complainant Mahesh Kaisare. 2. Brief facts of the case may be stated as follows:- The complainant Mahesh Kaisare lodged complaint to the Police Station, Panaji alleging that on 7.8.2014, from 8.30 onwards there was religious function in his house. His neighbour Mrs. Smita Khaunte i.e. the present petitioner had been to his flat and abused him as well as abused the priest who was performing religious function. After completion of the religious function when the complainant opened the main door at about 3.30p.m opposite the petitioner's flat, the petitioner came to attack his grand daughter Ms. Prakhya aged 2 years who was in his wife lap. His wife tried to prevent her attack thereafter, the petitioner torn her clothes and injured herself with her nails and started shouting. After receipt of the complaint, the police officer, in...
Dr. Dhananjai Kumar Pandey Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation/Anti Co ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-29-2015
K.L. Wadane, J. 1. The present petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to quash and set aside the First Information Report bearing Crime No.RC/6(A)/2014/CBI/ACB/GOA dated 5.8.2014 registered by the CBI/ACB Goa under Section 420 r/w 120-B of Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 2. The brief facts of the case may be stated as follows: The petitioner and his wife Dr. Anju Pandey are the Scientists at the National Centre for Antarctic and Ocean Research (NCAOR) Goa, an Autonomous Research Institute under the Ministry of Earth Sciences (MOES), Government of India. On 05.8.2014, Mr. V. Ashok Kumar, Additional Superintendent of Police incharge Head of Branch CBI/ACB/Goa, lodged a complaint against the present petitioner and the other accused persons for the offence as referred above. 3. We have perused the contents of the First Information Report. In short the allegations are as follows: (1) In the year 2002, the accused nos.1 to 4 en...
Bank of Baroda, Through its Panaji Branch Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. and Other ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-29-2015
1. By this appeal, the appellant/original plaintiff is challenging the judgment and order dated 10/6/2014 passed by the learned Adhoc District Judge-I (FTC), Panaji in Regular Civil Appeal No.85/2012. By the impugned judgment, the appeal filed by the respondents/original defendants has been allowed thereby dismissing Special Civil Suit No.172/2003/B filed by the appellant. 2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal may be stated thus: That the appellant is a banking corporation established under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970. The appellants are having branch offices at various places including one at Panaji-Goa. The respondent no.1 is the head office of HDFC bank, while the second and the third respondents are branches of the HDFC bank at Mumbai and at Panaji-Goa. 3. A Demand Draft bearing no. PG 098111 for Rs.900/- was purchased on 1.2.2003 in the name of one Shri Ashwin Babhubhai Trivedi. The said Demand Draft was purchased...
Laxmibai Govind Bhat Korde Vs. Yeshwant Palni, (Since deceased) Repres ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-23-2015
Oral Judgment 1. Heard Shri S. D. Lotlikar, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Appellants and Shri G. Agni, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents. 2. The above Appeal came to be admitted on 17.09.2009, on the following substantial question of law: "(1) Whether the impugned judgment and decree is vitiated for failure on the part of the First Appellate Court, to appreciate that a Civil Suit is to be decided on preponderance of probability and the Trial Court after concluding that the plaintiff had established title as well as possession in respect of the suit property, had decreed the suit of the Appellant against the defendant, who was found by the Trial Court to have neither title, nor possession in respect of any part of the property surveyed under No. 118/0, particularly in view of the fact that the First Appellate Court found nothing wrong in the Trial Court's finding that the defendant had failed to establish such title or possession? (2) Whether the appreciation of ...
Maria Christine Rebillet Perdriau and Another Vs. Goa Coastal Zone Aut ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-23-2015
F.M. Reis, J. 1. Heard Mrs. Anarkali Agni, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners, Ms. Purna Bhandari, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent nos. 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, Mr. Shivan Desai, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent no.5 and Mr. Jitendra Supekar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 6 and 7. 2. Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents waives service. 3. The above petitioners inter alia seeks a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ direction or order quashing and setting aside the order dated 29.5.2015 passed by the learned National Green Tribunal, Western Zone at Pune. 4. Briefly the facts of the case are that the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 had filed a petition being Writ Petition No. 872/2012 inter-alia challenging the construction activities being carried out by the re...
Ramanand P. Raicar and Others Vs. State of Goa, through Water Resource ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-21-2015
Oral Judgment: (F.M. Reis, J.) 1. Heard Shri Shivan Desai, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. A. N. S. Nadkarni, learned Advocate General appearing for the respondents. 2. Rule. Heard forthwith, with the consent of the learned Counsel. Mr. D. Lawande, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents waives notice. 3. We have heard Shri Shivan Desai, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. A. N. S. Nadkarni, learned Advocate General appearing for the respondents. It was pointed out by Mr. Shivan Desai, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners that the petitioners had filed an application for conversion of their land bearing Survey No.67/11 of Revenue Village Navelim, Salcete, Goa, admeasuring an area of 10,450 sq. metres. But, however, by communications dated 9th June, 2014 and 7th May, 2015, the respondent No.2 refused to examine their applications stating that the conversion could not be considered as there was a piece of land admeasuring...
M. Ashraf Nagarwala Vs. The Chief Officer, Margao Municipal Council an ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-20-2015
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The respective Counsel appearing for the respondents waive service. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 29/06/2014 passed in the Second Municipal Appeal No.MIN/UD/44/2014 by the appellate authority thereby granting ex-parte stay to the judgment and order dated 3/09/2014 passed by the Goa Municipalities Appellate Tribunal in Municipal Appeal No.67/2014. 3. The brief facts are that the appellant is a lessee of the respondents no.2 and 3 in respect of a shop in the new market at Margao and is carrying on business of sale of sarees, textiles, etc. therein. It appears that the appellant had approached the first respondent on 7/04/2014 seeking permission to carry out certain work in the shop premises which according to the appellant was confined to carrying out some anti termite treatment and repairs and furnishing and white wash. It appears that on 22/04/2014, the appellant was s...
Prashant Savlo Nagvekar Vs. Shilpa Shivaji Kumbhar and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-19-2015
1. Heard Mr. Pangam, learned Advocate for the appellant and Mr. A. Afonso, learned Advocate for the respondent no.4. 2. The present appeal is preferred by the original respondent no.1 against the judgment and the award passed by the Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panaji, in Claim Petition No.33/2007 dated 3rd June, 2010 by which, the Claim Petition of the petitioner is partly allowed and the compensation of Rs. 2,62,275/- is awarded to the claimants. 3. The parties are referred to their original status. 4. The widow and the minor sons of deceased Shivaji filed a Claim Petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, inter alia contending that the deceased Shivaji, aged about 38 years old, was a Transport Operator and working as a Transport Contractor with M/s. Gati Limited and was earning Rs.7000/- per month. 5. On 28.6.2006 the deceased was travelling in the Tata Tempo bearing Registration No.GA-01-T-7387 driven by the respondent no.1-appellant and was p...
M/s Sociedade de Fomento Industrial Limited Vs. Sita Shripad Narvekar ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-19-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Mr. Nadkarni, learned Counsel waives service on behalf of the respondents. Heard finally with the consent of the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner who is the original defendant is challenging the order dated 30.06.2015 passed by the learned Ad-hoc Senior Civil Judge, Margao in Special Civil Suit No. 58/2013/III. By the impugned order, the application filed by the petitioner for exhibiting certain documents has been dismissed. 3. The brief facts are that the petitioner served a notice to admit the documents, on the respondents under Order 12 Rule 3 of the C.P.C. The notice was served on or about 18.11.2014. The documents which the petitioner wanted the respondents to admit are some letters by the petitioner to the respondents which are in excess of a thousand communications. It is further undisputed that the respondents did not specifically deny the said documents. In that view of the matter, an application came to be fi...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »