Mumbai Nagpur Court August 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.
Suresh S/O. Pandurang Tidke Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-24-2012
Oral Judgment: (M.L. Tahaliyani, J.) 1. The appellant has been convicted of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of rupees one thousand in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months. The appellant was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khamgaon along with five others. The appellant was accused No.1 in Sessions Trial No.19 of 2000. The appellant and original accused Nos. 2 to 6 were tried for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323 read with Section 149 and 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. At the conclusion of trial, all the accused, except the appellant, were acquitted of all the charges framed against them. The appellant was also acquitted of rest of the charges except the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Complainant Yashwant Ganuji Tidke was residing at village Shahapur, Tahsil : Khamgaon, ...
Sheshrao S/O Chirkutrao Ingle Vs. Santoshrao Jagobai Yelekar Since Dec ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-24-2012
Oral Judgment: Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard finally at the stage of admission as a notice of final disposal was issued to the respondents by an order dated 11.11.2011 and the respondents are duly served with the notice. 2. The petitioner is the original defendant. A suit was instituted by the respondent-plaintiff against the petitioner for eviction and possession. The respondent-landlord had pleaded that he was entitled to possession of the suit premises under section 16(1)(a),(b) and (g) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. It would not be necessary to refer to the pleadings in regard to the claim of the respondent under section 16(1)(a) and (b) as both the authorities had rejected the claim of the respondent for possession on those grounds. Since both the courts have concurrently held that the respondent-landlord was entitled to possession of the suit property under section 16(1)(g) of the Act of 1999, it is necessary to refer to the facts relatin...
Mangesh Haribhau Ramekar and Another Vs. Shivdatta Sahebrao Kadu and O ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-23-2012
Oral Judgment: Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard finally as a notice for final disposal was issued to the respondents by an order dated 02/12/2011 and the respondents are duly served with the notice. By this petition, the petitioners impugn the order passed by the trial court on 13/07/2011 allowing the application filed by the respondents under section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure and staying the suit filed by the present petitioners. 2. The petitioners had filed Regular Civil Suit No.26/2010 against the respondents for a permanent injunction restraining the respondents, their agents or servants from disturbing the peaceful possession of the petitioners over the suit property. It is not in dispute that respondent no.2 Kanta Kadu had also filed Regular Civil Suit No.8/2010 against the petitioners, respondents and certain other persons for partition and separate possession of the suit property. It was the case of respondent No.2 Kanta Kadu that she had one ...
Prabhu Motiram Pamnani Vs. Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Kham ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-23-2012
Oral Judgment: By this petition, the petitioner impugns the order passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Khamgaon on 17/02/2006 rejecting the application filed by the petitioner for stay of suit. The petitioner also challenges the order dated 14/08/2006 holding that the plaintiff's evidence be proceeded without cross-examination. The petitioner is the original tenant. A suit was instituted by the respondent against the petitioner for eviction and possession. Before institution of the special civil suit against the petitioner, permission was obtained by the respondent under the provisions of the C.P. And Berar, Letting of Houses And Rent Control Order, 1949 to issue quit notice to the petitioner. However, the order of the Rent Controller was challenged by the petitioner before the Additional Collector. During the pendency of the rent control proceedings in appeal, an application was filed by the petitioner for stay of the suit filed by the respondent for eviction and possession of ...
Bharat S/O Mahadu Khade Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-22-2012
Oral Judgment: (M.L. Tahaliyani, J.) 1. The appellant has been convicted of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four months, by the Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Buldhana, by his judgment and order dated 20th August, 2007 in Sessions Case No.102/2005. 2. The appellant was tried along with five other accused i.e. accused Nos.1-Mahadu Haribhau Khade, 3-Ganesh Mahadu Khade, 4-Sau. Savita Bramhadev Aandhale, 5-Sau. Rekha @ Renuka Ashok Musale and 6-Sau. Kesharbai Tukaram Mapari for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307 read with Section 149 and 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The original accused Nos.1 and 3 to 6 have been acquitted of all the charges and the appellant has been convicted of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code simplicitor. 3. The prosecution ca...
New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Subhash S/O Bhimrao Gore and Othe ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-22-2012
Oral Judgment: This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 17/1/2003 passed by 2nd Additional District Judge and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur in Claim Petition No.358/1996 thereby allowing the petition partly and awarding total amount of compensation of Rs.2,48,000/- on account of death of one Gajanan Kharpuriya who left behind him a widow, minor children and aged parents. 2. Incident occurred on 27/3/1996. While the deceased was riding bicycle, the offending vehicle i.e. jeep bearing No.MH-31-8018 came from opposite direction and knocked him down. Therefore, the claimants/respondents herein filed petition for award of compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-. 3. The respondent no.1/owner of the vehicle was proceeded ex parte. 4. The appellant - original respondent no.2 filed written statement. Their main defence was that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid driving license when the accident occurred. 5. The learned Tribunal framed issues....
Dattaprabhu S/O Sharadchandra Joshi Vs. the State of Maharashtra and A ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-21-2012
Oral Judgment: Heard. Rule. By consent of the parties, the matter is heard for final disposal. Such order was made in the past. 2. This petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and also under section 482 of Cr.P.C.. The proceeding is filed for the relief of quashing and setting aside the order made by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Yavatmal in Criminal Case No. 564/2007. The Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Yavatmal has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under section 294 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1) (x) and 3(1) (xi) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The order made by the Magistrate is confirmed by the Sessions Court in Revision No. 92/2007. 3. The respondent no.2 is an Advocate. His cousin sister Smt. Madhuri Walke has been working as Jr. Clerk in the Office of the Deputy Conservator of Forest, Yavatmal. She was transferred from one section to other section on 27.11.2006. She approac...
Dattaprabhu S/O Sharadchandra Joshi Vs. the State of Maharashtra and A ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-21-2012
Oral Judgment: Heard. Rule. By consent of the parties, the matter is heard for final disposal. Such order was made in the past. 2. This petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and also under section 482 of Cr.P.C.. The proceeding is filed for the relief of quashing and setting aside the order made by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Yavatmal in Criminal Case No. 564/2007. The Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Yavatmal has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under section 294 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1) (x) and 3(1) (xi) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The order made by the Magistrate is confirmed by the Sessions Court in Revision No. 92/2007. 3. The respondent no.2 is an Advocate. His cousin sister Smt. Madhuri Walke has been working as Jr. Clerk in the Office of the Deputy Conservator of Forest, Yavatmal. She was transferred from one section to other section on 27.11.2006. She approac...
Sadashiv S/O Ganpatrao Mahajan Vs. the Honand#8217;ble Minister for Co ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-16-2012
1. Rule, made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties. 2. The dispute in this petition relates to the disqualification of the respondent No.4 Prafulla s/o Khushalrao Mankar, as the Director of the respondent No.3 Yavatmal District Central Co-operative Bank Limited, Yavatmal (for short, “the said Bank”) under clause (ii) of Section 73EA of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (for short, “the said Act”) on the ground that he is an office bearer of the defaulted Primary Agricultural Credit Co-operative Society, viz. Saoner Gramin Vividh Karyakari Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit, Ralegaon, District Yavatmal (for short, “the said Society”). 3. In exercise of the power under sub-section (1) of Section 78 of the said Act, the respondent No.2 Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Amravati Division, Amravati, passed an order on 12-5-2010 removing the respondent No.4 as Director of t...
Hitendrasingh S/O Bhupendrasingh and Others Vs. Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-16-2012
S.C. Dharmadhikari, J. 1 These Writ Petitions were to be heard finally at the admission stage and therefore, with consent of parties, we proceed to issue Rule on each of these petitions. With their further consent, we dispose them of finally by this common judgment. 2 These Writ Petitions under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India question the order dated 16.12.2011 passed by the Chancellor of Dr.Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth (for short “PDKV”), pursuant to which the appointment of each of the Petitioners either as Senior Research Assistant (for short “SRA”) or Junior Research Assistant (for short “JRA”) stands cancelled. 3 Mr.Manohar, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners requested us to refer to the facts in Writ Petition No. 238/2012. Accordingly, it would be advantageous to refer to these facts to appreciate the challenge raised. 4 It is common ground that the PDKV is an Agricultural University and therefore, g...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »