Mumbai Goa Court September 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.
S.R. Phal, Retd. Reader, Goa University and Others Vs. H.E. The Govern ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-16-2015
K.L. Wadane, J. 1. These Writ Petitions are filed by the petitioners namely Mr. S. R. Phal and Mr. V. J. Kamat challenging the order dated 13.07.2005 passed by the Chancellor of Goa University by which 50% of the pension of the petitioners is withheld. 2. The brief facts of the case may be stated as follows : The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 255 of 2006 namely Mr. S. R. Phal was a Chairman of the Board of Examination at the relevant time (herein after referred to in short as Charged Officer CO1? and the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 482 of 2006 namely Mr. V. J. Kamat was working as an Assistant Registrar and heading Section I of the Examination Division of Goa University (herein after referred to in short as Charged Officer CO3?. Another Officer Mr. U. S. Parab CO2? has not challenged the order. Therefore, we are concerned only with the allegations made against the CO1 and CO3 by the disciplinary authority. 3. The case of the disciplinary authority, i.e. Executive Council of the U...
Rubertina Souza Vs. Marto Dias and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-15-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Mr. Godinho, learned Counsel waives service on behalf of the respondent no. 1 and Mrs. Linhares, learned Additional Government Advocate waives service on behalf of respondent no. 2. Heard finally with the consent of the parties. By this petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 9/9/2014 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, South Goa, in Civil Misc. Application no.23/2014. By impugned order, the learned District Judge has refused to condone the delay of 148 days in filing a revision application. 2. The brief facts are that the second respondent/Village Panchayat had issued a stop work notice in respect of the construction undertaken by the petitioner on the ground that it was unauthorized and without any construction licence/permission. Subsequently on 27/4/2009, the Deputy Director of Panchayats passed an order directing demolition. That was challenged by the petitioner before the Director and initially th...
Abdul Sattar Kulli Vs. Aisham Bi Mamlekar (since deceased) represented ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-08-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Ms. A. Agni, learned Counsel waives service for the respondents. Heard finally by consent. 2. The petitioner is the tenant of the respondents. The respondents had filed eviction proceedings against the petitioner before the Rent Controller. By an order dated 29/09/1997, the Rent Controller had allowed the application directing eviction of the petitioner. This was challenged by the petitioner before the Administrative Tribunal. It is undisputed that by virtue of amendment to the Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 which came into force on 24/05/2013 the jurisdiction to hear the appeals from the order of Rent Controller was transferred to the District Court. According to the petitioner the files were not physically transferred to the District Court for quite sometime. In the meantime, the respondent- Smt.Aisham Bi expired on 16/07/2014. Eventually, on 20/10/2015, the files were transferred to th...
Sejal Sushant Naik and Another Vs. Nikhil Madhukar Sadhale and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-07-2015
1. The present appeal is filed by the original claimants against the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Presiding Officer of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panaji, in Claim Petition No. 5/2006 dated 28.01.2010 by which the learned Presiding Officer has partly allowed the claim petition and awarded compensation of Rs.9,97,177/- together with interest at the rate of 9% per annum. 2. The parties are referred to their original status. 3. The claimants are the widow and son of the deceased Sushant who died in the motor vehicular accident on 28.11.2005. On the date of the accident i.e. on 28.11.2005, the deceased Sushant aged about 35 years was travelling in a maruti zen car bearing No. GA-01-J-1312 driven by his friend from Ponda to Bhamai. On reaching near Dada Vaidya Chowk at about 00.05 hours, the tempo trax jeep bearing registration No. GA-01-E-9975 driven by the respondent no.1 came from the wrong direction at a very fast speed, in rash and negligent manner and dash...
Fatima Gomes Furtado and Others Vs. Indirabai Vinayak Lotlikar and Oth ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-04-2015
Oral Judgment : 1. Heard Mr. P. Rao, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. J. Godinho, learned Counsel appearing for respondents no.1, 4 to 12. 2. The above appeal came to be admitted by an order dated 13/11/2009 on the following substantial questions of law: a) Whether the Lower Appellate Court could have reversed the Decree passed by the learned Trial Court after holding that the Appellants' predecessor in title vide Deed of Sale dated 17.01.1916 purchased the suit property in as much as pursuant to such Deed of Sale, the Appellants proved the title to the suit property and it was incumbent upon the Lower Appellate Court to decree the suit in terms of prayer clause (b) for declaration and further direct demarcation of the suit property in terms of prayer clause (aa), b) Whether in view of the clear Title Deed viz. Deed of Sale dated 17.01.1916 and the plan of the Communidade showing the purchase made by the Appellants, could the Lower Appellate Court deny 5 SA No.81 of...
Joaquim Antonio Pacheco and Another Vs. Gopal Datta Varik and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-04-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr. Anthony D'Silva, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants. None for the respondents though served. 2. The above appeal came to be admitted on 30/07/2008 on the following substantial question of law: 1. Whether the first Appellate Court has misconstrued the document of title of the plaintiffs/appellants? 2. Whether the first Appellate Court wrongly cast the burden on the plaintiffs to prove that the suit was within limitation? 3. Mr. Anthony D'Silva, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants has pointed out that the appellants claim to be owners in possession of the property which came to be gifted in favour of the appellants pursuant to a Gift Deed dated 26/10/1962 executed by the parents of the appellants. The learned Counsel further points out that based on the said Gift Deed the property was described in Land Registration Office under no.26371 and inscribed in inscription no.22629 in the name of the appellants. The learned Counsel further submits t...
The Village Panchayat of Betqui-Candola, Through its Sarpanch Vs. M/s ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-04-2015
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Shri Simoes, learned Counsel waives service on behalf of respondent no. 1. None for respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4. Heard finally by consent. 2. By this petition, the Village Panchayat of Betqui-Candola is challenging the judgment and order dated 07.08.2015 passed by the respondent no. 3, thereby confirming the order dated 08.07.2015 passed by the respondent no. 2, directing the petitioner to grant permission/renewal of the construction license to the respondent no. 1. 3. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the petition may be stated thus: That, respondent no. 1 had applied for a license for construction of residential cum commercial complex and compound wall in Survey No. 112 (part) of village Candola, Ponda, Goa. That license, was issued by the petitioner on 10.02.2012. That license, was signed by the Sarpanch of the petitioner-Village Panchayat. The said license was valid for a period of three years. On 07.02.2015, the respondent no. 1 ...
Krishna Bombo Naik Dessai and Another Vs. Shaba Bombo Fogir, alias Sha ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-03-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Shri Sudin Usgaonkar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Appellants and Shri Dukle, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents. 2. The above Appeal was admitted by this Court by an Order dated 01.04.2009, on the following substantial questions of law: (a) Whether the Courts below committed illegality in finding fault with the Appellant for not proving the source of acquisition of title of his predecessor in title, when such a challenge could only have been thrown by the heirs of Bozro or Fulu and the same was not available to the Respondents? (b) Whether the First Appellate Court committed illegality in discarding the Sale Deed on the ground of identity, when identity of the property was not in issue before the Trial Court; the parties being adidem on the same? (c) Whether the First Appellate Court overlooked that the counterclaim of the respondents filed in the Trial Court to declare the Sale Deed of 1974 null and void having been dismissed, and there ...
Dr. Purnima Sanjeev Ghadi Vs. The State of Goa, through the Secretary ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-03-2015
F.M. Reis, J. 1. Heard Mr. S. D. Lotlikar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. M. Salkar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents No.1 and 2, Mr. Sudesh Usgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents No.3 and 4 and Ms. A. Agni, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent No.5 2. The above petition takes exception to the order of termination passed by the respondent No.3, whereby the services of the petitioner as a Teacher on regular basis in the College of the respondents No.3 and 4 came to be terminated. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the College run by the respondents No. 3 and 4, which is covered under the Grant-in-Aid Scheme of the State Government, had invited applications for filling up two posts of Lecture in the Department of Botany, out of which, one post was to be filled up on regular basis in the unreserved category and the other on lecture basis. In response to such advertisement, the petitioner applied on 12/9/2008 to...
Goa Housing Board, Through its Managing Director and Another Vs. Deval ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-02-2015
Oral Judgment: ( Per F. M. Reis, J) 1. Heard Mr. H. D. Naik, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. C. A. Ferreira, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. Admit. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned counsel. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent waives service. 4. Both the appeals have been taken up together for final disposal as both challenge the same judgment and award dated 20.12.2014 passed by the learned District Judge-1, North Goa, Panaji Goa. The parties shall be referred to in the manner they so appeared in the cause title of the impugned award. 5. The above appeals challenge the judgment and award dated 20.12.2014 passed by the learned District Judge-1, North Goa, Panaji Goa, in Land Acquisition Case No. 44/2009 whereby a reference preferred by the applicant under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (herein after referred to as the said Act?) was partly allowed and the compensation for the land acquired was fixed at the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »