Mumbai Nagpur Court July 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.
Shri V.S. Bhanse Constable R.P.F. Dog Squad Vs. Union of India Through ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-27-2012
A.B. Chaudhari, J. 1. Heard. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned Counsel for the rival parties. FACTS: 2. By the present petition the petitioner has put to challenge the order No.282/2009 dated 12.12.2009, issued by the appellate authority, imposing higher punishment of retiring the petitioner compulsorily from service so also the order No.101/2011 dated 27.4.2011 of punishment by which the punishment for stoppage of three increments for three stages for three years with cumulative effect was imposed on the petitioner. 3. The petitioner was working as a member of Dog Squad BPQ (Nagpur Division) at Ballarshah and was the handler of the dog by name 'Rover'. The petitioner has been in service for the last 20 years in the Police Force and Railway Protection Force (RPF). On 27.7.2009, his duty was from 8:00 hours to 16:00 hours, when the two dogs 'Rusty' and 'Rover' were taken by him in the ground for training when both of them were playing and fighting ...
Ganesh S/O Shalikram Kasdekar and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-25-2012
Oral Judgment: On 16th April, 2012 when the matter was called out none had appeared on behalf of the appellants and the matter stood over to 29th July, 2012. Again on 29th July, 2012 none was present for the appellants and, therefore, so as to decide the appeal as soon as possible, Shri. H. S. Rahangdale, learned Advocate, has been appointed (amicus curiae) to represent case on behalf of the appellants. 2. This Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order passed by IInd Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Achalpur in Sessions Trial No. 83/2004, dated 19/12/2005 whereby the appellants were convicted of the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of which to undergo further simple imprisonment for three months. 3. Facts stated, in nutshell, are as under:- On 11th May, 2004 at about 7:00 p.m., injured Subhash (PW5) and his wife Kantabai (PW4) w...
Sk. Kalu Sk. Ibrahim and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-25-2012
1. This Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 16/10/1998, passed by learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Akola in a Sessions Trial No. 144 of 1997, whereby the original accused were convicted of the offences punishable under Sections 148,149, 307, 326, 323 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for various durations of 3 months to 5 years and to pay a fine in the sum of Rs.500/- to 1000/- for various offences. In default of payment of fine, they were directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for the durations of 15 days to six months respectively. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. 2. Heard the submissions at the bar. 3. The Facts, in nutshell, are as under: Injured witnesses Radhesham Shrivas (PW1), Sunil Ambhore (PW2), Devanand Jadhav (PW3), resident of Village Gadge Nagar, Akola knew each other as also the accused. First informant Radhesham, a Barber by profession, along with his brother Sundar went to the H...
Ganesh S/O Shalikram Kasdekar and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-25-2012
Oral Judgment: On 16th April, 2012 when the matter was called out none had appeared on behalf of the appellants and the matter stood over to 29th July, 2012. Again on 29th July, 2012 none was present for the appellants and, therefore, so as to decide the appeal as soon as possible, Shri. H. S. Rahangdale, learned Advocate, has been appointed (amicus curiae) to represent case on behalf of the appellants. 2. This Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order passed by IInd Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Achalpur in Sessions Trial No. 83/2004, dated 19/12/2005 whereby the appellants were convicted of the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of which to undergo further simple imprisonment for three months. 3. Facts stated, in nutshell, are as under:- On 11th May, 2004 at about 7:00 p.m., injured Subhash (PW5) and his wife Kantabai (PW4) w...
Suryamani S/O Baliramji Suryawanshi Vs. Smt. Pournima W/O Bhimrao Keva ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-25-2012
Oral Judgment: Rule, made returnable forthwith. Heard Shri Khapre, the learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant; and Shri Jaiswal, the learned counsel for the respondent-landlady. 2. The Trial Court has passed a decree for eviction of the petitioner-tenant from the shop blocks in question on 3-3-2010 in Regular Civil Suit No.271 of 2003 on the ground of bona fide requirement established by the respondent-landlady. In Regular Civil Appeal No.219 of 2010 preferred by the petitioner-tenant, the learned District Judge-7, Nagpur, by his judgment and order dated 5-3-2011, has confirmed the decree passed by the Trial Court on the ground of bona fide requirement. The Appellate Court allowed the cross-objection of the respondent-landlady and also passed a decree on the another ground putforth by the respondent-landlady under Section 16(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, viz. that the tenant has, without the landlord's consent given in writing, erected on the premises any permanen...
The State of Maharashtra, Through Anti-corruption Bureau Vs. Khudaram ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-24-2012
Oral Judgment: 1. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 12.1.2001 passed by the Special Judge, Nagpur in Special Case No. 4 of 1991 whereby respondent/accused has been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13 (i) (d) and 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, the State of Maharashtra has preferred the present appeal. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. The facts, in brief, are as under: According to first informant Gunwant, he wanted to cut branches of trees standing on the boundary of his field. He went to the house of respondent/accused on 6.1.1990 who was, at the relevant time, working as Forest Guard. He gave oral permission to the complainant. Complainant engaged his cousin brother Vikram as a labour and after cutting, loaded the branches in a bullock cart. According to complainant, respondent-accused accosted the bullock cart on way and asked the complainant to take it to check post. At check-post, respondent/accus...
Surendrakumar Madhusudan Mor Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Through the ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-24-2012
S.C. Dharmadhikari, J. Rule. Respondents waive service. By consent Rule made returnable forthwith. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in so far as it provides for limitation of three months for filing of an application thereunder on the ground that it deprives the land holders from getting rightful amount of compensation. 2} The petitioner has also prayed that a communication dated 9th May 2011 from the Collector, Yavatmal, be set aside. 3} The petitioner submits that he owns the land bearing Gat No.128 admeasuring 5.27 hectares situated at mouza Pimpri (Hatgaon), Taluka and District Yavatmal. The respondent No.1 by the Notification dated 18th January 2003 issued under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”), proposed to acquire 33.95 hectares land of mouza Pimpri for minor irrigation project, including 2.27 he...
Smt. Gangabai W/O Krishnarao Mandalik Vs. Lrs. of R Sole., 1A. Smt. Ja ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-24-2012
1. This is an appeal directed against the judgment and decree dated 24/1/1995 passed by Additional District Judge, Nagpur in Regular Civil Appeal No.107/1990 thereby conforming the judgment and decree dated 21/2/1990 passed by Civil Judge Junior Division, Saoner in Regular Civil Suit No.58/1986 thereby suit filed by the plaintiff respondent herein for declaration and delivery of possession of the suit land came to be decreed. 2. One Eknath who is the original owner of the agricultural land area 0.67 H.R. and the house No.38 situated at Bramhani, Tq. Kalmeshwar, Distt. Nagpur (for short “suit property”) which is the subject matter of instant appeal who died in the year 1953 leaving behind him a widow Salubai and two daughters namely Chindhabai original plaintiff and Gangabai original defendant. Salubai mother of the plaintiff and defendant died in the year 1983. Before her death, on 19th October 1982 she executed the sale deed of the suit properties in favour of the plaintif...
Sadashiv S/O Bhimgauda Patil and Another Vs. Pro-interactive Services ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-24-2012
Oral Judgment: (Smt. Vasanti A.Naik, J.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The issue involved in this petition is as to who should decide the dispute in regard to the applicability of the Maharashtra Private Security Guards (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act, 1981. According to the petitioners, the respondent no.2 Board constituted under the Act of 1981 does not have jurisdiction to decide the question and the State Government has jurisdiction to decide the same in view of the provisions of Sections 5 and 15 of the Act of 1981. 3. The petitioner no.2 Bank had set up 33 A.T.Ms. and had also engaged certain persons for house keeping and care taking of the A.T.Ms. An inspection was conducted by the Inspector of the respondent no.2 Board on 4/10/2010 and it was found by the respondent no.2 Board that certain Security Guards were engaged at the locations where the A.T.Ms. were set up. The p...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Suhas S/O Sitaramji Tambe and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-24-2012
Oral Judgment: Both these appeals are directed against the judgments and awards dated 10.12.2010 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur in Claim Petition Nos.1115/2005 and 1114/2005 whereby the petitions were allowed partly and compensation of Rs.1,70,000/- and Rs.7,68,400/- respectively were awarded to the claimants on account of death of Shashikala and Sitaram Tambe, who died in motor vehicular accident occurred on 14.08.2005 involving truck bearing Registration No.CG-04/G-7817 insured with the appellant. 2. The appellant put forth defence that there was breach of term of insurance policy in the sense that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding valid driving license. 3. The learned tribunal framed issues. The evidence adduced before the tribunal was oral as well as documentary. The learned tribunal accepted the defence that there was breach of term of insurance policy for the reason that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding the valid driving lice...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »