Mumbai Nagpur Court May 2012 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.
Jagdeo Sukhdev Hirole (Dead) Through L.Rs. and Others Vs. Divisional C ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-11-2012
1. Heard. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned Counsel for the rival parties. 2. In the present petition the petitioner ‘employee has put to challenge the judgment and order dated 20.12.2010, passed by the Additional Labour Commissioner and Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 in Appeal No.PGA/65/2010, rejecting the claim made by the petitioner and confirming the order passed by the Controlling Authority on 9.9.2010. 3. In support of the writ petition, Advocate Shri Khan argued that the petitioner had claimed supplementary gratuity in terms of the Regulation No. 11 of the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (Gratuity Fund) Regulations as amended, which provides for supplementary amount of gratuity in case of permanent disability, which had occurred in case of the petitioner/employee, but the claim has been denied for no reasons and on improper and illegal interpretation of the regulation. There is a further misco...
Ramesh Raghobaji Kirtane and Others Vs. the Chandrapur District Centra ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-09-2012
1. Heard. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned Counsel for the rival parties. 2. All these petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. Writ Petition Nos.1919/2011, 1920/2011, 1921/2011 and 1922/2011 have been filed by respondent nos.2 to 5 in the original Complaints (ULP) No.121/2006, 125/2006, 126/2006 and 130/2006. 3. Writ Petition Nos.4666/2011, 4667/2011 and 4582/2011 have been filed by the original complainants in Complaint (ULP) Nos. 121/2006, 126/2006 and 125/2006. These complaints were decided by common judgment and order on 8.3.2011 by the Industrial Court, Chandrapur. FACTS : 4. The original complainants filed complaints (ULP) Nos.121/2006, 125/2006, 126/2006 under Section 28 r/w Item Nos.5 and 9 of Schedule IV the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short _ the MRTU and PULP Act, 1971) claiming that respondent nos.2 to 5 in the complaints filed by them were...
Mahanagar Sudhar Samiti Vs. Akola Municipal Corporation, Through Munic ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-08-2012
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. Looking to the nature of controversy and as interim order has been granted by this Court, we have accepted the request of the parties to decide the matter finally at the stage of admission itself. Accordingly, we have heard Shri Gordey, Senior Advocate with Mrs. Raskar, Advocate for the petitioner, Shri Madkholkar, learned counsel for respondent No. 1, Shri Manohar, Senior Advocate with Shri Gaikwad, Advocate for respondent No. 2, Shri Sambre, Government Pleader for respondent No. 3, Shri Lohiya, learned counsel for respondent No. 4, Shri Dhore, learned counsel for respondents No. 5 and 6, by making rule returnable forthwith. 2. The challenge in this petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India is to resolution dated 20.03.2012 passed in General Body Meeting of Akola Municipal Corporation, insofar as the determination of respective strength of the members representing the petitioner and Respondent No. 4 on Standing Committee and consequential nomi...
Shivrao Wamanrao Deshmukh and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-08-2012
Oral Judgment: 1. Both the appeals are filed against the Judgment and Order passed in Special Case No. 1/2000, which was pending in the Court of Special Court, Khamgaon, District Buldana. The appellants from both the appeals are convicted and sentenced by the Trial Court for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1) (d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Both the sides are heard. This Court has perused the original record. 2] In short, the facts leading to the institution of two appeals can be stated as follows: The complainant Subhash Murthe wanted to register the sale deed made by him in favour of one Smt. Deokabai Tawari in the office of Sub Registrar, Jalgaon Jamod, District Buldana. Accused no.1 Shri Kale was working as the Sub Registrar and accused Shri Deshmukh was working as a peon in this office. On 6.4.1998 the complainant purchased stamp papers for execution of the sale deed and he deposited the charges in respect of registration of the ...
PravIn S/O Dattuji Divte and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra and O ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-07-2012
Mrs. Sadhana S. Jadhav J. 1. The appellants herein are original accused nos. 1,3,5,6 and 7 in Sessions Case No.28/2008 decided by Sessions Judge, Yavatmal by a judgment and order dated 21.5.2011. Eight accused persons were facing the trial in Sessions Case No.28/2008. Original accused nos. 2,4 and 8 are acquitted of all the charges levelled against them. The State has filed Criminal Appeal No.393/2011 challenging the acquittal of original accused nos.2,4 and 8. The accused/appellants are convicted for offences punishable under Section:- (a) 147 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for 1 year. (b) 148 of Indian Penal Code and are sentenced to suffer R.I. for 2 years. (c) 302 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default to suffer further R.I. for 1 year. 2. The original accused no.6 i.e. Pravin Dattuji Divte is convicted for offence punishable under Section 120-B of IPC and sentenced to suffer...
Anand Tarachand Chindale and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-07-2012
Oral Judgment: [Mrs. Sadhana S. Jadhav, J.] 1. The appellants herein are challenging their conviction and sentence recorded by Ad-hoc Additional District Judge, Yavatmal in Sessions Trial No.23/2006 by a judgment and order dated 30.6.2009. The charge under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with 149 of Indian Penal Code was framed against those persons in Sessions Trial No.23/2006. The original accused nos. 4 to 6 are acquitted for the offence punishable under Sections 302 read with 149 of I.P.C. The original accused nos. 1 to 3 are acquitted for offences punishable under Sections 147 and 148 of I.P.C. The original accused Nos. 1 to 3 (the present appellants) are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and are sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.500/- each in default further rigorous imprisonment for 6 months. 2. The case of the prosecution is as follows:- (a) Krushnarao Marotrao Likhar (PW2) runs a vegetable shop. He ...
Abdul Arif Abdul Karim Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-05-2012
Oral Judgment: [Mrs. Sadhana S. Jadhav, J.] 1. The appellant herein stands convicted for offences punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in-default to suffer further Rigorous Imprisonment for 3 months and Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in-default to suffer further Rigorous Imprisonment for 3 months, by the Ad-hoc District Judge _ 3 and Additional Sessions Judge, Amravati, in Sessions Trial No.69 of 2004, by his judgment and order dated 22.2.2007. 2. The case of the prosecution in a nutshell is as follows : “[a] On 26.2.2004, Ravikant s/o Sulabrao Dhoke, who was posted as P.S.I. at Nagpurigate Police Station, lodged a report contending therein that on 26.2.2004 at about 12.05 midnight, Farzana Parveen, resident of Jamir Colony, Amravati, was brought to the Police Station in an injured condition. She had sustai...
Mrs. Vanmala Manoharrao Kamdi and Others Vs. the Deputy Charity Commis ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-04-2012
A.B. Chaudhari, J. 1. Heard. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. All these matters are taken up for final disposal with consent of the learned Counsel for the rival parties. 2. In these letters patent appeals and writ petitions, learned Counsel for both parties made their submissions on the questions, which we have framed in this judgment. 3. Advocate Shri Khapre appearing for the appellant in Letters Patent Appeal No.368/2011 made the following submissions : (i) The Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 was enacted to regulate and make better provisions for the administration of public religious and charitable Trusts in the State of Bombay. Various officers who are required to implement the provisions of the said B.P.T. Act, 1950, namely the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Deputy Charity Commissioner, Joint Charity Commissioner and Charity Commissioner are performing judicial functions or in respect of some provisions; the quasi-judicial functions. That is evident from the reading of several pr...
Gokuldas Rambhau Rangari and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Other ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-04-2012
Mrs. Sadhana s. Jadhav, J. 1. The appellants herein are challenging their conviction in Sessions Case No. 19/2003 recorded by the 1st Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Yavatmal, by a judgment and order dated 14.6.2006. 2. The appellants are convicted for offence punishable under Section:- (a) 147 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 months and fine of Rs.500/- each in default further rigorous imprisonment for 1 months. (b) 148 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 months and fine of Rs.500/- each in default further rigorous imprisonment for 1 months. (c) 302 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- each in default further rigorous imprisonment for 2 years. (d) 324 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 months and to pay fine of Rs.500/- each in default further rigorous imprisonment f...
Rajesh Bhaurao Sadanshiv Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-02-2012
SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV J. 1. The appellant herein stands convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.500/- in default further rigorous imprisonment for 3 months by the 2nd Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Akola in Sessions Trial No. 153 of 2005 by a judgment and order dated 1.11.2006. Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellant herein has preferred the present criminal appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell is that:- On 29.8.2005 Mahadeo Suryabhan Dhokne lodged a report at Old City Police Station, Akola alleging therein that on 29.8.2005 at about 1.30 p.m. one Balu Sapkal resident of the same village, informed him that his nephew namely Siddharth was lying dead under the banyan tree in front of the house of Shivlal Dhokare. MahadeoDhokne, therefore, rushed to the spot and noticed that his nephew Siddharth was lying in a pool of blood. He had inquired about the incid...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›