Mumbai Nagpur Court February 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.
The Managing Director (M.D.) Maharashtra State Co-operative Tribal Dev ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-26-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. Heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioners employer take exception to the order passed by the competent authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (for short the said Act) directing payment of a sum of Rs.1,80,000/- to the respondent No.1 with interest @ 10% per annum. This order has been confirmed in appeal by the appellate authority on 17-1-2014. 3. The facts in so far as the same are relevant for adjudicating the challenge as raised are that the respondent No.1 was employed as a Grader with the petitioners since 4-11-1978. He came to be dismissed from service on 23-5-2000. On 18-4-2011, he filed an application before the Controlling Authority praying that the employer be directed to pay him gratuity under provisions of the said Act. The employer opposed the aforesaid application on the ground that the same was time barred. The entitlement of the respondent No.1 to receive gratuity was also disputed. The C...
Vinayak Vs. The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Departmen ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-26-2015
A.B. Chaudhari, J. 1. By the present petition, the petitioner claims declaration that his age of retirement or superannuation be declared as 60 years, with all consequential benefits. FACTS: 2. The date of birth of the petitioner is 28.06.1940. He was appointed as Assistant Teacher by appointment order dated 05.08.1963/16.08.1963 by Chief Executive Officer, Buldana. He worked in Government High School, Khamgaon till 28.02.1999. He used to teach standards 5th to 10th as Special Teacher (Craft Teacher). Vidarbha region was the part and parcel of Madhya Pradesh and after reorganization, it became the part of the Maharashtra State. Reorganization having taken place w.e.f. 01.05.1960, the Madhya Pradesh Secondary Education Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the MP Act) was applicable in the Vidarbha region and continued to apply till 01.01.1966. The teachers serving in the secondary schools as well as middle schools in the Vidarbha region, therefore, were governed by the earlier service ...
M/s. Goodearth Agro Chem Pvt. Ltd. and Another Vs. The Container Corpo ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-20-2015
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. Both these writ petitions arise out of the same order passed by the Inquiry Officer Shri Srinivas Mudgerikar, who is Respondent No. 2 in both these petitions. The facts briefly stated are: M/s. Goodearth Agro Chem Private Limited imported manganese ore from Indonesia. The cargo was handled by Shipping line M/s. Trans Asian Shipping Services Private Limited. According to the carrier which transported cargo i.e. the Container Corporation of India Limited, there was mis-description. Instead of declaring cargo to be manganese ore, it was stated to be general cargo. It, therefore, imposed penalty. There was a previous petition before this Court and because of directions therein, Respondent No. 2 Srinivas Mudgerikar was appointed as Inquiry Officer. He found M/s. Trans Asian Shipping Services Private Limited as also M/s. Goodearth Agro Chem Private Limited, jointly and severally liable to pay penalty. His reports/ order dated 10.09.2012 is questioned in both these...
Swapnil and Others Vs. Neha and Another
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-18-2015
A.B. Chaudhari, J. 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. By the present application, applicant no.1husband, applicant nos. 2 and 3 father and mother-in-law of non applicant no.1 have invoked the power of this court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal procedure for quashing of the criminal proceedings under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code in Regular Criminal Case No. 0404538/2013 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chandrapur upon its transfer from Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pune to Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chandrapur, pursuant to the order dated 20.08.2014 in Criminal Application No. 1/2014 decided by this Court. 3. In support of the present application, Mrs. Anjali Joshi, learned counsel for the applicants, submitted that non applicant no.1 had lodged FIR with Police Station, Loni Kadbhor, Pune and as such upon investigation, the said Police Station had filed charge...
Sanjay @ Papdya @ Pawan @ Prashant @ Rahul Kale @ Pawar Bhosale @ Chav ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-17-2015
Oral Judgment: (Per P.N. Deshmukh, J.) 1. This appeal takes exception to the judgment and order dated 29th of November, 2011 passed by learned Extra Joint (Ad hoc) Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur in Sessions Case No.5 of 2010, thereby convicting the appellant/accused for the offence punishable under Section 396 read with Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life. 2. In brief, it is the case of prosecution that PW 3 Riddhishwar Warjukar, the complainant, was doing money lending business at village Mohadi, Tq. Nagbhid, Distt. Chandrapur. On 3rd of November, 2003, he was at Nagpur with his family members leaving his mother Kasabai (deceased) and two servants being PW 1 Kewalram Dadmal and PW 2 Yadav Dudhkute in the house at Mohadi. It is alleged that in the night intervening 3rd of November, 2003 and 4th of November, 2003 at about 1.00 am, 20 to 25 persons having armed with sticks and other weapons, in order to commit dacoity, entered th...
Bharat Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-16-2015
Oral Judgment : 1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order passed on 06.4.1999 in Sessions Trial No. 29 of 1992, thereby convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 363 of Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to suffer R.I. for three months. 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are as under: (a) The incident, in this case, had taken place in the early morning of 09.11.1991. At that time, the prosecutrix was residing with her parents and brothers at village Yermal. The appellant was also residing in the same village. Since he had developed love affair with the prosecutrix, it was decided by them that he would come to her house in the morning of 9.11.1991 and take her to Adilabad. As per the plan, the appellant arrived outside the house of the prosecutrix and made a sound call in the language already decided by the two. The prosecutrix responded. She came outside...
Jaywant Govindrao Sanap Vs. Janki Shikshan Prasarak Sanstha and Anothe ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-16-2015
1. The writ petition is filed by the employee challenging the order passed by the School Tribunal dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner upholding the order of termination of his services by the respondent no.1 Management. 2. The undisputed facts are that the petitioner had been in the employment of the respondent no.1 Management since 1999 and was promoted as the Headmaster of the School administered by the respondent no.1 Society, on 1.7.2004. The Education Officer had granted approval to the promotion of the petitioner as the Headmaster of the School. The respondent no.1 Management issued the statement of allegations to the petitioner on 27.10.2008 making 14 allegations against the petitioner. The petitioner had given his explanation in the matter, however, the respondent no.1 Management was not satisfied with the explanation given by the petitioner and decided to conduct enquiry. The respondent no.1 Management nominated Sau. Shobha Digambar (President of the respondent...
Vijay Ganpat Mogre and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra through the Sec ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-16-2015
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. Rule. Rule is made returnable and heard finally with the consent of Shri Kaptan, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Kalangiwal, learned Advocate for the petitioners, Shri Kale, learned AGP for respondent Nos. 1, 3, 5 and 6 and Shri Kothari, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 4. 2. The petitioner in this writ petition has approached for declaration that award passed in Land Acquisition Case No. 1/65/2005-2006, Mouza Khutala, District Chandrapur, on 15.03.2008 is illegal and void. The other prayer is to declare that after purchase notes issued under Section 49, the land acquisition proceedings could not have been initiated at all. 3. This Court has heard the parties on 28.10.2014 and passed the following order: Heard for some time. The question is why Legislature has made two provisions in Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 i.e. Section 49 and section 127. Whether the recourse to section 49 is permissible only to get land removed from reser...
Prabhakar Venkobaji Manekar Vs. Surendra Dinanath Sharma
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-12-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. Heard finally with consent of learned counsel for the parties. 2. This Writ Petition at the instance of the tenant takes exception to the decree for eviction passed by the trial Court under provisions of Section 15(3) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 (for short the said Act) as upheld by the first appellate Court. The premises in question is a ground floor shop that is used for running business by the petitioner. According to the petitioner said premises were let out on monthly rent of Rs. 500/- per month. According to the petitioner said amount of rent was being regularly paid till the year 2000 after which the respondent-landlord stopped accepting the same. Subsequently money orders were sent by the petitioner for the months of March, April and May 2000. On 29.04.2008 notice came to be issued by the landlord calling upon the tenant to pay arrears of rent for the period from 01.07.2000 to 30.04.2008. The arrears were demanded at the rate of Rs. 5000/- ...
Kaprecon Sleeper Works Pvt. Ltd. and Others Vs. Union of India, throug ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
Common Judgment: (A.P. Bhangale, J.) 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties. Facts in Writ Petition No.1907 of 1998 : 2. On or about 13.3.1981, the petitioner/Company was awarded a Contract bearing no. W.188.C.360 with the respondent/Railway to supply two lakh ten thousand units of Monoblock Prestressed Concrete Sleepers (hereinafter referred as 'MPCS units') to the Railways. The respondents had enhanced the above order by further two lakh MPCS units of 60 KG specifications. The petitioner/Company manufactured and supplied the MPCS units and have received payments from the respondents. On 24.9.1990, the respondent awarded the first repeat order for manufacture and supply of 7,50,000/- (seven Lakh fifty thousand) and 82,000 (eighty two thousand units) inclusive of adhoc orders sanctioned by Railway Board vide letters dated 10.5.1989 and 7.12.1989. Accordingly, the petitioners have manufactured and supplied MPCS units. 3. On 24.3.1995, further repeat ad hoc order of one ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »