Mumbai Nagpur Court December 2015 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.
Jagjitsingh Vs. Shashikant Ramesh Tayde and Another
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-23-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. In Motor Accident Claim Petition No.241 of 2001 filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the respondent No.1-claimant is held entitled to compensation of Rs.3,81,000/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the petition, i.e. 10-9-2001, till its realization, after adjusting the amount already paid by the appellant towards no-fault liability. The owner of the vehicle is before this Court challenging the decision of the Tribunal. 2. The contentions of Ms Umale, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, are that the appellant was not served with the notice of Claim Petition No.241 of 2001 and, therefore, he had no opportunity to contest the claim, that the earlier Claim Petition No.67 of 1993 filed by the respondent No.1-claimant was dismissed in default on 6-3-1995 and, therefore, the second Claim Petition No.241 of 2001 was not maintainable for the same relief, and that the vehicle was insured with the respondent No.2-Na...
Chairman Cum Managing Director, Western Coalfields Ltd. Coal Estate, C ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-23-2015
P.C. 1. By following the procedure analogous to provisions of Order 47 Rule 8 of the Order of Civil Procedure Code 1908, the learned Counsel for the parties have been reheard on the question as regards entitlement of respondent No.1 to receive amount of gratuity despite the fact that he has been dismissed from service after holding departmental enquiry. 2. On behalf of the petitioner, it was submitted by Shri A. M. Gordey, learned Senior Counsel that a dismissed employee was not entitled to receive gratuity. Reference was made to the provisions of Section 4(1) of the said Act to urge that as respondent No.1 had been dismissed from service, he would not be covered by provisions of Section 4(1)(a) to (c). These clauses contemplate entitlement for gratuity on superannuation, retirement, resignation, death or disablement. Reference was also made to provision of Section 4(6) of the said Act. Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Y.P. Sarabhai Vs. Union Bank of India an...
Rekha Pramodrao Deshmukh and Others Vs. Gajanan Maharaj Sansthan Shega ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-23-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. In view of notice for final disposal issued earlier, the learned Counsel for the parties have been heard at length by issuing Rule and making the same returnable forthwith. The short question that arises for consideration in these writ petitions is whether provisions of Section 24 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 (for short, the said Act) would entitle a landlord to recover possession of premises given for business purposes on expiry of the license granted in that regard. 2. Aforesaid question arises on the following facts. An agreement was entered into between each petitioner and respondent No.1 by which each petitioner was granted license for a shop to conduct business of sale of prasad for a period of eleven months. Pursuant thereto each petitioner was put in possession of their respective shops. The possession of the respective shops were not handed over to respondent No.1 after expiry of the licences. As the petitioners apprehended dispossession, suit fo...
Ballarpur Industries Limited Vs. Maharashtra Lok Kamgar Sanghatana and ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-18-2015
B.R. Gavai, J. 1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.3944 of 2006 thereby allowing the petition of respondent no.1 and setting aside the order passed by the learned Industrial Court and allowing the complaint of respondent no.1, the appellants have approached this Court. 2. The facts in brief giving rise to the present appeal are as under:- Respondent no.1 which is undisputedly an unrecognized Union filed a complaint being Complaint ULP No.1286 of 1987 under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as "MRTU and PULP Act) under Item Nos. 5, 6 and 9 of Schedule IV of the said Act. However, the said complaint came to be withdrawn. 3. A subsequent complaint being Complaint ULP No. 964 of 2000 came to be filed only under Item Nos. 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of the MRTU and PULP Act. In the said complaint it was contention of th...
Hukumchand and Others Vs. The Collector, Nagpur and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-18-2015
Oral Judgment: (Vasanti A Naik, J.) 1. RULE. Rule is made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioners have sought the cancellation of the special meeting dated 02.06.2015 for considering the No Confidence Motion against the petitioner nos.1 and 2 as the respondent nos.4 to 7, who participated in the special meeting, were disqualified from being the members of the Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Kamptee. 3. While the Agriculture Produce Market Committee of Kamptee was constituted, the respondent nos.4 to 6 were elected by the members of the managing committees of the Agriculture Credit Societies and Multipurpose Credit Cooperative Societies as per Section 13(1)(a)(i) of the Act of 1963. So also, the respondent no.7 was elected by the members of Village Panchayats functioning in the market area as per Section 13(1)(a)(ii). Admittedly, when a notice for cal...
Koyla Shramik Sabha and Another Vs. Deputy Registrar of Trade Unions N ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-17-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. In view of notice for final disposal, the learned counsel for the parties have been heard at length. 2. The petitioners are aggrieved by issuance of consent certificate dated 27.08.2015 by the Deputy Registrar of Trade Unions, Nagpur. Said Consent Certificate has been issued by making corrections in the earlier consent certificate dated 23.07.2015. 3. According to the petitioners, the petitioner No. 2 came to be elected as President of the petitioner no. 1 Union on 03.03.2014. This fact was informed to the Management on 12.05.2015 and according to petitioners same was duly accepted y the Management. The respondent nos. 2 and 3 made an application to the respondent no.1 under provisions of Trade Unions Act, 1926 (for short, the said Act) and Rules framed thereunder for making necessary enquiry and issuing a consent certificate alleging that as per the elections held, the office bearers and committee members as shown in Annexure A to the said application were entitled t...
Dr. Gulab Vs. The State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-17-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. Rule heard forthwith, with the consent of the learned counsel for the rival parties. 2. This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in respect of Crime No.3012/2015 for offence punishable under section 294, 507 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (1)(x) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989 registered at Police Station: Dighori, Dist. Bhandara. 3. Perused the F.I.R. dated 11.9.2015 lodged by complainant-Dr. Savita Bhaurao Maldongre, caste Gond? Scheduled Tribe. The course of the alleged incriminating material in the FIR, is roughly translated as under : On the second day, dated 10.09.2015, in the morning at about 8.45, I had been on my duty, at Primary Health Centre, Barvha. At about 4.30 p.m., Smt. Sonwane, Health Assistant (Arogya Sevika), Barvha, had played the recording of the abuses given by Dr. Kapgate, the present applicant through Mobile Phone No 9764476745, which was given on 9.9.2015 at about 7.54 p.m. In the recording playe...
Sudha Rajesh Halmare and Another Vs. The Oriental Insurance Company Lt ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-17-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Admit. The learned counsel waives service of notices. Heard the matter finally by consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties. 2. This application seeks review of the judgment and order dated 8th September, 2014, passed by this Court in First Appeal No. 485 of 2013. 3. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal had held in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 88 of 2009, the owner of the truck, the driver and the Insurance Company jointly and severally liable to pay compensation of Rs.15,02,496/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till its realization. The Insurance Company preferred First Appeal No. 485 of 2013 before this Court which was allowed on 8th September, 2014. 4. When the matter was heard and decided, none appeared in for the respondents. 5. The claimants have moved this application for review of the judgment dated 8th September, 2014. 6. The matter was initially listed before this Court on 13th Octo...
Kanchan Vishwanath Jagtap and Another Vs. Maharashtra Administrative T ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-16-2015
Oral Judgment: (B.R. Gavai, J.) 1. The petitioners have approached this Court being aggrieved by the order dated 3.4.2014 passed by the learned Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur to the extent it sets aside the order dated 17.02.2011 vide which the petitioners in the present petitions are selected to the posts of Deputy Director of Health Services and the G.R. dated 5.12.2012 vide which the State Government has appointed these petitioners and further directing respondent- Maharashtra Public Service Commission to prepare fresh list of candidates to be called for interview from the category of Open (Female). 2. The facts in brief giving rise to the present writ petitions are as under:- The State of Maharashtra had invited applications for the posts of Deputy Director of Health Services, Maharashtra Medical and Health Services Group A. In the advertisement , one post was shown reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Castes converted to Buddhisim, one was reserved for Nomadic ...
M.S. Constrotech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-10-2015
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. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a declaration that the petitioner is entitled to participate in the tender process initiated by the tender notices bearing no. 423 and 424 displayed by the respondent Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation on its website. The petitioner has challenged the communication of the respondent dated 28-7-2015 disqualifying the bid of the petitioner. The respondent no. 5 published an e-tender on 25-5-2015 vide two separate tender notices bearing no. 423 and 424 for the construction of civic amenities to rehabilitate Village Palsoda and Village Takali Watpal under the Jigaon Project. The estimated cost of the work to be executed in Village Takali Watpal was Rs. 766.192 Lacs and the estimated cost of the work to be executed in Village Palsoda was Rs.753.598 Lacs. The petitioner submitted ...