Mumbai Nagpur Court November 2013 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.
Manoj and Another Vs. Chandrakishore and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-28-2013
1. Rule, made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties. 2. The petitioners are the original plaintiffs, who have filed a suit for declaration that they are the owners of Shop No.169/1, admeasuring 220 sq. ft. in Survey No.18/1, Nazul Sheet No.7D of Tumsar, District Bhandara, and the defendants have no right to the said property. A decree for permanent injunction has also been claimed, restraining the defendants from disturbing the possession of the plaintiffs over the suit property. The plaintiffs have also filed an application Exhibit 5 for grant of temporary injunction restraining the defendants from disturbing their possession over the suit property. A further order of temporary injunction is also claimed restraining the defendants from executing the decree passed in Regular Civil Suit No.2 of 1996. 3. The respondents are the original defendant Nos.1 to 5. One Smt. Nandrani Devi, widow of Shalikram Chaurasia, along with the res...
Vithalrao Narayanrao Agre Dead Through L.Rs. and Others Vs. Surendraku ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-26-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree passed in Regular Civil Appeal No. 11 of 1994 by the Additional District Judge, Gondia, thereby allowing the Appeal and reversing the judgment and decree passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 424 of 1987 by the Civil Judge, Jr.Dn., Gondia, on 5.1.1994. 2. Appellants are the legal heirs of deceased original defendant and respondent is the original plaintiff. For convenience, they are being hereinafter referred to as defendant and plaintiff, as they were before trial Court. The plaintiff being the landlord of Block No.3, situated in the chawl on sheet no. 4, plot no. 8/14, 8/15 and 8/24, at Railtoli, Gondia, hereinafter referred to as suit premises, filed a suit against his tenant, the defendant, for recovery of possession of suit premises and damages, after obtaining necessary permission to issue quit notice from the Rent Controller. 3. The plaintiff submitted that after receiving necessary permission, he had issued s...
Prakash Pundlik Palaskar and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra and A ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
Oral Judgment: (A.B. Chaudhari, J.) Heard. 2. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the rival parties. 3. The applicants herein have filed this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the matter of Regular Criminal Case No.296 of 2010 arising out of Crime No.37 of 2010, registered with Dongaon Police Station and the said criminal case is pending before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mehkar, District : Buldana. 4. When the application was called out today for hearing the learned counsel, who are present with the respective parties i.e. applicant and non-applicant No.2 complainant, submit that the offences alleged against the applicants are under Sections 407 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. According to the learned counsel for the rival parties, both the offences are compoundable and that being so, the compounding is required to be allowed by this Court in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code of C...
Maharashtra Shikshan Prasarak Mandal and Another Vs. Kawadu Pandurangj ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-21-2013
Oral Judgment: Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard the matter finally by consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties. 2] This petition challenges the order dated 19.11.2010 passed by the School Tribunal in Appeal No. STC/81/2003, deciding a preliminary issue and holding that the appointment of the respondent no.1 employee was as per the provisions of Section 5 of M.E.P.S. Act read with Rule 9 (9) of the Rules framed thereunder. The order holds that the respondent no.1 employee belongs to Scheduled Caste category and though he was appointed against a vacancy reserved for Scheduled Tribe candidate, there was no restriction for making an appointment of a candidate belonging to another reserved category, if the candidate belonging to category for which the post is reserved is not available. 3] The petition also challenges the ultimate judgment and order dated 06.01.2012 passed by the School Tribunal in the said Appeal, holding that the initial appointment of the responden...
Shrikrishna Ganuji Sonone Vs. Vitthal
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-20-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. This appeal arises out of the judgment and decree passed by the District Judge, Khamgaon in Regular Civil Appeal No.68 of 1988 on 14.10.1997 thereby partly allowing the appeal and setting aside the decree of specific performance granted in favour of appellant in Regular Civil Suit No.86 of 1987, decided on 22.4.1988. 2. This appeal is being heard afresh on merits after the Hon'ble Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by the respondent bearing Civil Appeal No.10537538 of 2011 (arising out of SLP (C) Nos.2859728598 of 2010) filed against the judgment of this Court in this appeal delivered on 17.12.2009. By this judgment, this Court had allowed the present appeal and decreed the suit as ordered by the trial Court. The Hon'ble Apex Court, however, for the reasons stated in the order dated 2nd December, 2011 passed in aforestated Civil Appeal, set aside the said judgment and remitted the matter to the High Court for fresh disposal on merits. 3. It was the case of the app...
National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Udhao and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-20-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard. 2. First Appeal No.859/2012 arose out of the judgment and award dated 28.2.2011 passed in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.64/2006, whereby the learned Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandrapur allowed the application under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act and awarded a sum of Rs.50,000/- along with simple interest @ Rs. 7% per annum from the date of application till its realization. 3. First Appeal No.861/2012 arose out of the judgment and award dated 28.2.2011 passed in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.65/2006, whereby the learned Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandrapur allowed the application under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act and awarded a sum of Rs.50,000/- along with simple interest @ Rs. 7% per annum from the date of application till its realization. 4. It is not in dispute that both the awards under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act arose out of the same incident of accident. In the case registered as MA...
Pramodkumar Vs. Liladhar and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-18-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties. 2. This appeal challenges judgment and order dated 12.8.2010, passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gondia, in Claim Petition No.6 of 2003, whereby the Tribunal awarded sum of Rs.1,72,000/- inclusive of no fault liability payable jointly and severally by owner, driver and insurer of the offending motor vehicle. The owner of the offending vehicle was specifically and exclusively directed to pay the interest on the awarded amount at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition i.e. w.e.f. 18.12.1995 till realization of the amount. 3. The liability to pay the interest on the awarded amount imposed by the Tribunal is disputed by the appellant on the ground that the lawyer engaged by the appellant did not take care to prosecute the petition properly and hence claim petition was decided ex parte on 16.11.2005. It is the case of the appellant that he came to know of the ex parte a...
Kantilal Mangilal Kothari and Others Vs. Bhujang Bapurao Phukey and Ot ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-13-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. When appellants no. 1, 4 and wife of appellant no. 1 Shobha were standing by the side of their Luna bearing No. MGT 9046, ambassador car bearing No. MZV 1861 driven by respondent no. 1; owned by respondent no. 2 and insured with respondent no. 3 dashed against it from back side. All the three received injuries. Shobha who suffered serious injuries, was shifted to General Hospital, Amravati where she died. According to claimants, Shobha (aged about 35 years) was sel-femployed and was engaged in tailoring work. She used to earn Rs. 1500-2000 per month from that work. Appellants claimed Rs. 3 lacs as compensation on various counts. 3. Learned Member of the Tribunal after taking into consideration the evidence led on record and hearing the parties, awarded compensation of Rs. 90,000/- inclusive of interim compensation of Rs. 25,000/- together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of application till realization of the award amount. 4. According to the c...
Union of India, Through General Manager Vs. Pandurang Son of Deepaji P ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-13-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. Appellant Union of India, through South Central Railway, Secunderabad has challenged legality and validity of order dated 20.12.2002 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur Bench in Claim Application No. 18/OA-II/RCT/NGP/1997 granting compensation of Rsw. 4 lacs to the respondents together with interest @ 6% per annum. 2. Facts are that Deepaji Pawar, father of applicant no. 1 and husband of applicant no. 2, was travelling from Osmanpur to Devalgaon-Awachat by Daund-Purna Passenger train on 4.7.1996. At Devalgaon Station, driver of the Train suddenly applied brakes which resulted in jerks and Deepaji fell down and died. 3. Respondent Railway Administration denied the claim on the following grounds (i) Deceased Deepaji was not a bonafide passenger; (ii) Applicants have not given complete particulars; and (iii) Deepaji might have fallen down due to carelessness. 4. First Information Report, Accidental Death Report, Inquest Panchanama, Spot Panchanama, Postmortem ...
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Through Its Divisional Co ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-12-2013
Oral Judgment: (Z.A. Haq, J.): 1. Heard Mr. Charpe, learned Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Jagdale, learned Advocate for respondents 1 and 2 and Mr. Ghodeswar, learned AGP for respondent no.3. 2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. 3. Writ Petition is filed by the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, body Corporate constituted under the provisions of the Road Transport Act, challenging the order passed by the Industrial Court, Nagpur, in Complaint (ULP) No. 262/2006 on 6th September, 2011 by which the Industrial Court has declared that the Corporation is engaged in unfair labour practice under Item 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as MRTU and PULP Act) by not providing alternate employment to respondent no.1. The Industrial Court has directed the petitioner to pay wages to respondent no.1 for the period 2nd August 2002 till the date of attaining the age of superann...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »