Mumbai Nagpur Court October 2014 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 Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-31-2014
Oral Judgment: V.M.Deshpande, J. 1. The appellant is convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge4, Nagpur on 9.8.2012 in Sessions Trial No.457 of 2011 whereby the learned Judge convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for committing murder of his wife Megha and directed him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month. 2. We have heard Mr.C.H.Jaltare, learned Counsel for the Appellant, Mr.S.M.Uikey, learned A.P.P. for respondent no.1/State and Mr.R.R.Vyas, learned Counsel for first informant/respondent no.2. With their able assistance, we have gone through the record and proceedings. 3. Deceased Megha was wife of the present appellant. The couple was having two daughters and one son. The daughters are Ku.Sharyu (PW-1) and Ku. Pranjali (PW-3). According to the prosecution case, upon the first information report (Exh.16) filed by Sharyu (PW-1),...
VIP Industries Shramik Sangh Vs. VIP Industries Limited, A Public Ltd. ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-31-2014
1. This Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenges the order dated 27-09-2013 passed below Exhibit-10 thereby holding that the statement of claim filed by the petitioner Union in relation to the transfer of 140 employees was beyond the scope of the industrial dispute that had been referred for adjudication. By order dated 23-12-2013, notice for final disposal was issued and accordingly the learned Counsel for the parties have been heard at length. 2. The petitioner is a Union of employees registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926 and is also recognized under the provisions of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 [for short, the Act of 1971]. The respondent no.1 is a Public Limited Company wherein the employees represented by the petitioner Union are employed. On 28-02-2007 there was a settlement between the Union and the Management which settlement was to remain in force till 31-12-...
Vakil Jalilkhan Pathan Vs. Deputy Director of Education, Nagpur Divisi ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-31-2014
Oral Judgment: B.P. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. Heard Advocate Shri P.N. Shende for the petitioner, Shri A.S.Fulzele, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent nos. 1 and 2 and Advocate Shri B.H. Shambarkar for respondent nos. 3 and 4. 2. Considering the nature of controversy, matter is heard finally by issuing Rule and making it returnable forthwith. 3. Advocate Shri P.N. Shende submits that the petitioner claims increment for the period prior to his reinstatement in terms of the judgment of the School Tribunal dated 20-02-2001. According to him, the petitioner has been reinstated with continuity as also backwages and when the matter went before the Honble Apex Court, the petitioner only waived backwages. Hence the benefits of continuity should have been given and while reinstating the petitioner back in service, his wages should have been fixed after releasing increments notionally till that date. He submits that when the omission of Management to fix the wages accordingly was...
Chief Engineer, Irrigation Vibhag (Govt. of Maharashtra), Sinchan Bhav ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-31-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Since common issues arise in all these writ petitions, they are being decided by this common judgment. 2. Rule in each writ petition. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. 3. In these writ petitions, the order dated 7-1-2013 passed by the learned Judge, Labour Court Gondia in proceedings under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the said Act) allowing aforesaid application in each case and granting relief to the respondent is under challenge. There being similarity of facts in each case resulting in common reasoning in each order, the facts in Writ Petition No.6380/2013 are being referred to. 4. The respondent claimed to have been working on daily wages with the petitioners since the year 1981. He continued to do so till the year 2000. According to the respondent, in terms of the Kalelkar Award, those employees who had been working continuously for a period of five years in t...
Kamlabai and Others Vs. The State of Maharashtra, Through the Collecto ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-30-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. These appeals arising out of the judgment and decree dated 20th July, 1998 passed in Land Acquisition Case No.50/1991 by Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The appellants in First Appeal No.520/1998 are the claimants whose land bearing field survey No.225/2 of Mouza Asra, Taluka Bhatkuli, District Amravati admeasuring 1.23 H.R. approximately equivalent to 3 acres was acquired by the respondents, who are the appellants in First Appeal No.164/1999 for extention of village gavthan. The Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 15.2.1989. The Land Acquisition Officer determined the value of the land at the rate of Rs.6,500/ per acre and accordingly passed the award on 30.3.1991. Since the claimants felt that the compensation was insufficient and grossly disproportionate to the actual market value of the land, the award was challenged by making reference under Section 18 of the Land Ac...
Radhyesham Ramkaran Choube Vs. A.S. Mogare, through L. Rs. and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-30-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. These appeals arise out of common judgment dated 10.08.2001 thereby allowing said appeals filed by the original defendant and setting aside the decree for possession. In view of similarity of facts and common evidence being led in the suits, these appeals are being decided by this common judgment. 2. For sake of convenience, the appellant is being referred to as the plaintiff while the respondents are being referred to as defendants. The suit property comprises of premises in occupation of the respondents initially in the capacity as tenants. The entire house property was owned by one Robort Sitaram and each defendant was the tenant of the respective portions let out to them. The rent payable by each of the defendant was Rs. 30/- per month. On 29.08.1979 the defendants entered into an agreement with their landlordRobert Sitaram for purchasing their respective premises. However, subsequently on 28.12.1979 the plaintiff purchased said property by registered sale deed. A...
Dinesh Wamanrao Dhawale and Others Vs. Collector, Amravati and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-30-2014
Oral Judgment: P.R. Bora, J. 1. The order dated 23.12.1996 passed by the Collector, Amravati i.e. respondent no.1 herein and the orders passed consequent thereto i.e the order dated 27.12.1996 passed by the Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Chandur Bazar i.e. respondent no.2 herein and the order dated 22.04.1997 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Amravati Division i.e respondent no.3 herein are questioned in the present Writ Petition. 2. The facts which are relevant for deciding the present petition can be stated thus : The Municipal Council, Chandur Bazar i.e. respondent no.2 published an advertisement thereby inviting the applications for filling in the posts of Coolie, Chowkidar and Chaprasi (Peon). Two such advertisements were published. One was for the post to be filled in the Municipal Council whereas other was for the post to be filled in the School run by the Municipal Council. The petitioners applied for the respective posts. They were interviewed by the Selection Committe...
Kalpana Vs. The Director, Maharashtra State Examination Board, Pune-1 ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-30-2014
Oral Judgment: B.P. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Order passed by respondent no. 1 withdrawing Diploma in Education given to petitioner, has been questioned in present writ petition. This Court issued notice on 24th December 1997 and granted adinterim relief staying that order dated 6th October 1997. While admitting the matter, after hearing all concerned, adinterim relief was confirmed. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner appeared for 1st Year D. Ed. Examination in April 1988 in all subjects. When she was attempting subject of Marathi language, she was questioned alleging recovery of a piece of paper from floor near her chair in the examination hall. Petitioner replied then that it was not belonging to her. She was, therefore, permitted to solve the question paper. Thereafter, Principal of her college took her to the office of respondent no. 1 where she was orally asked about the very same chit found near her chair. She again orally ...
M/s National Insurance Co. Ltd. through Divisional Manager Vs. Jayashr ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-29-2014
Oral Judgment : 1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and award dated 11.2.1999 passed in Claim Petition No. 206 of 1994 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur. 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are as under : Deceased Jayant who died in an accident on 15.5.1993 at about 8-30 p.m. was the husband of respondent no. 1 and father of respondents 2 and 3. At that time, he was proceeding on a bicycle from Panchsheel square towards Central Jail on Wardha Road and passing through Lokmat Square, when one scooter driven by respondent no. 5 suddenly appeared from the western side and gave a dash to his bicycle. As a result of the accident, deceased Jayant fell down on the road and sustained serious injuries. When he was taken to the Hospital of Dr. Rajiv Deshmukh, he was declared dead. The respondents 1 to 3 contended that the accident occurred only due to rash and negligent driving of the scooter by respondent no. 5, which was owned by respondent no. 4. Therefore, they filed...
TVS Motor Company Limited and Others Vs. The State of Maharashtra, at ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-28-2014
Oral Judgment : 1. This application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is filed by the applicants, who are accused in Summary Criminal Case No.109 of 2013 pending on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mohadi. Accused No.1 is a Company known as M/s TVS Motor Company Limited. The applicants are facing trial for the offence punishable under Section 36(1) of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009. 2. The contention of the applicants is that they cannot be made vicariously liable for the alleged offence only because they are members of the Board of Directors of the Company. It is submitted by learned Senior Counsel Shri Sunil Manohar that there are no allegations of any nature against either of the applicants and it is contended that the prosecution against them is nothing but sort of abuse of process. 3. Learned Senior Counsel Shri Sunil Manohar has submitted that in fact the 'chain kit' on which mandatory declaration inclusive of all taxes is not mentioned has not b...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »