Mumbai Goa Court August 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.
Brenda Nazareth Menezes and Others Vs. Andre de Menezes and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-24-2015
1. Admit. Learned Counsel for the respondents waives service. Heard finally with consent. 2. By this appeal, the appellants (original respondent nos.1, 2, 4 and 5) are challenging the order dated 29/07/2015 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panaji in Civil Miscellaneous Application No.38/2015/A in Inventory No.57/2015/A. By the impugned order, the learned Trial Court has directed sealing of the office premises as stated in prayer (I)(b) and had ordered listing of the articles. 3. The brief facts are that the present respondent nos.1 and 2 have initiated Inventory Proceedings of the estate leavers Cosme de Menezes and his wife Maria Renee Menezes. The dispute is between the descendents of Cosme de Menezes from his first marriage on the one side and the descendents born out of second marriage of Cosme de Menezes with the appellant no.1, Brenda Menezes on the other. The case made out before the Trial Court is that the succession of estate of said Cosme, during first marr...
Jacinto Da Silva Vs. Maria Filomena Da Silva and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-21-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Shri M. B. D'Costa, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Ms. Asha Desai, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent nos. 1, 14 and 19. 2. The above Writ Petition takes exception to the Judgments dated 30.04.2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division at Margao and the Judgment dated 27.07.2010 passed by the learned Adhoc District Judge, South Goa, at Margao, in Regular Civil appeal no. 74/2008. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that Inventory Proceedings were initiated upon the death of Joao Batista de Silva and his wife Maria Augusta Oliveira. The said estate leavers had four daughters namely Maria Juliata Melda Da Silva, Maria Clara Da Silva, Filomena Da Silva and Maria Natalina Da Silva, three Sale Deeds dated 14.05.1975, 15.07.1977 and 23.02.1979 the said three daughters except Filomena sold their respective illiquid asset/right of inheritance in the estate of their parents Joao Batista da Silva and Maria Augusta Oliveira...
Chandrawati Punu Gaonkar and Others Vs. Nilu Manju Velip and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-21-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr. S.S. Kakodkar, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. C.A. Coutinho, learned Counsel appearing for respondents no.1 to 5. 2. The appeal came to be admitted by an order dated 10/08/2007 on the following substantial questions of law: 2(a) Whether First Appellate Court was right in applying provisions of Benami Transaction Prohibition Act 1988 to conclude that, the suit property was purchased in the name of the father of the Plaintiffs 1, 3, 4 and Defendant No.3 as he was major and elder and not jointly in the name of the father of the contesting defendants by Deed of Sale of December 1926 when there was no bar in law to purchase the suit property in the name of the minor father of the contesting Defendants 1,2 and 5 in the Deed of Sale of December 1926? 2(b) Whether Benami Transaction Prohibition Act 1988 which came in force on 5th September 1988 and provisions of Section 3,5 and 8 thereof on 9.5.1988 was applicable to the suit property bearing s...
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s. Chowgule and Company Ltd.
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-20-2015
Oral Judgment: (Mohit S. Shah, C.J.) 1. Both the above Tax Appeal No.6 of 2008 and Tax Appeal No.7 of 2008 under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 challenge the orders dated 12/07/2007 and 19/07/2007, respectively of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Panaji Bench. The relevant Assessment Year is 2002-03 in Tax Appeal No.6/2008 and 2003-2004 in Tax Appeal no.7/2008. 2. In view of the order which will be passed today, it is not necessary to set out all the facts in detail. By order dated 27/02/2008, both the appeals were admitted on the following substantial questions of law: (A) Whether the assessee is entitled to claim benefit of 10 years exemption by amendment to sub-section (3) of section 10B by Finance Act, 2001, with effect from 1/4/1994 or benefit of 8 years exemption under amendment by the Finance Act, 1988, with effect from 1/4/1989, particularly, when assessee commenced manufacturing/production from the year 1993? (B) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of th...
Dilip Ram Phal Dessai Vs. Yesso Vaman Pagi and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-20-2015
1. The present appeal is preferred by the original party no.10 against the judgment and award dated 11.12.2009 passed by the District Judge (3), South Goa, Margao, in Land Acquisition Case No.58/2006. 2. Parties are referred to as per their original status. 3. Brief facts of the case may be stated as follows:- The description of the suit: Plot bearing survey No.90/1 to the extent of an area 1030square metres situated at Village Poinguinim of Canacona Taluka (hereinafter referred to as Suit property? for short). 4. By notification dated 10.1.2002 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, (the Act? for short) the suit land was intended to be acquired for the construction of road from Velwado to Dharwatem. By the aforesaid notification, the Government was intending to acquire an area of 1030 square metres and after conclusion of the Land Acquisition Proceeding and after passing of the award, the party nos. 8,10 and 12 have claimed compensation determined for the acquired area. 5...
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd., Through its manager Vs. Vaib ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-14-2015
1. The present appeal is presented by the original respondent no.3 Insurance Company against the judgment and award passed by the Presiding Officer of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mapusa in Claim Petition No. 57/2010 by which the claim of claimants/respondent nos. 1 to 3 is allowed and the original respondents are directed to pay compensation of Rs.16,33,300/- together with interest at the rate of 9% per annum. 2. The parties are referred to their original status. 3. The brief facts of the case may be stated as follows: On 01.07.2009 the husband of the claimant no.1 and father of the claimant nos.2 and 3 was proceeding on a Bajaj pulsar from Pirna towards Cansa Thivim and when he reached at the spot of the accident at Keli Pirna, at about 12.35 p.m., the respondent no.1 drove rickshaw in a rash and negligent manner. Consequently, there was dash between the rickshaw and motorcycle and in the accident the deceased received serious injuries and succumbed. The deceased was the sole ...
M/s Costa Pinto Associates and Another Vs. M/s Ramdeo Maurya and Assoc ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-14-2015
1. By this appeal, the appellants/original defendants are challenging the judgment and decree passed by the learned Adhoc District Judge, Margao, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 157/2010, on 07.05.2011. The appeal filed by the appellants challenging the judgment and decree dated 17.03.2007, passed by the learned Civil Judge Senior Division at Margao in Special Civil Suit No. 25/1997/III, has been dismissed, thereby confirming the decree for Rs.2,58,976.70 alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum, passed in favour of the respondent/plaintiff. 2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal may be stated thus: The respondent/plaintiff was planning to construct a residential cum commercial complex by name The Royal Palms? in the property surveyed under Survey No. 398/1, in the village Benaulim, Taluka Salcete, Goa. The respondent as a R.C.C. Labour Contractor had entered into a contract with the appellants to undertake the construction of the said complex. Accordingly, an a...
The Regional Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation Vs. Sunil ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-13-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. By this appeal the Employees State Insurance Corporation (the Corporation? for short) is challenging the judgment dated 17.7.2007 passed by the Employees State Insurance Court (the ESI Court for short) in Employees Insurance Case no.14/2005. By the impugned judgment, the application filed by the respondent under Section 75 of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (the Act? for short) has been allowed thereby declaring that the respondent's establishment is not covered under the provisions of the Act. Further the ESI, Court has quashed the impugned orders dated 19.7.2005 and 7.11.2005 passed by the Appellant Corporation under Section 45-A of the Act as null and void. 2. Brief facts are that the respondent is a proprietory concern. It was claimed before the ESI Court that the proprietor Mr. Sunil Pai is educated up to class VII and was not conversant with any language other than Konkani. The respondent is carrying on business of providing/undertaking washing of vehic...
Ashish Anil Gaonkar Vs. Sr. Superintendent Officer, Department of Post ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-12-2015
Oral Judgment: (F.M. Reis, J.) 1. Heard Mr. J. Godinho, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, and Mr. M. Amonkar, learned Central Govt. Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. Rule. Heard forthwith, with the consent of the learned Counsel. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent waives service. 3. The above petition, inter alia, prays for a writ, direction, or order to quash and set aside an order dated 15th May, 2015 bearing No. B-II/AAG/MMS/Driver/Termination/15-16. 4. Briefly, the facts of the case, as stated by the petitioner, are that the petitioner, who has studied Xth Standard, received summons from the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bicholim in respect of a case No.IPC. Criminal Case No.6/S/2013/C for committing offences punishable under Sections 279 and 337 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The petitioner, accordingly, attended the proceedings on 20th March, 2014 before the learned Magistrate, wherein, being a minor motor accident, the peti...
M/s. Valpoi Valley Botanicals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Anil Ashok Jaware
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-10-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. By this appeal, the original complainant is challenging the acquittal of the respondent from an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (the N.I. Act, for short). 2. The brief facts are that the appellant, which is a Private Limited Company is dealing inter alia, in the business of sale of plants and supply of ornamental flowers. On 10.10.2010, the appellant had supplied to the respondent, cut Gerbera flowers worth Rs.91,020/- at his flower shop at Panaji. The respondent had issued a cheque of even date, drawn on Bank of India, Miramar Branch for Rs.91,020/-, towards the payment of price of the Gerbera flowers. When the said cheque was presented for encashment, it was returned dishonoured on account of insufficient funds. The appellant issued a statutory notice and thereafter, filed a complaint under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. At the trial, the appellant examined its representative, Mr. Rakesh Singh (PW-1) and produced certain do...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »