Mumbai Court February 1978 Judgments
The State of Maharashtra Vs. Yashwantrao Dattatraya Rananavare
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-10-1978
Reported in: (1978)80BOMLR91; 1978MhLJ698
Vaidya, J.1. There is no substance in the above Criminal Appeal filed by the State of Maharashtra against the order of acquittal passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur on May 30, 1974, in Sessions Case No. 91 of 1973 instituted on a private complaint filed by the complainant, Nanasaheb Vyankatrao Suryavanshi, alleging that the respondents who were accused Nos. 1 to 5, accused No. 2 being the mistress of respondent No. 1, had conspired together and forged the will purported to have been executed by the father of respondent No. 1 so as to defeat the right of the complainant's daughter who was the married wife of the respondent No. 1. The complainant merely relied on his own evidence and the certified copy of the judgment in probate proceedings instituted by his daughter to prove that the will was forged.2. The learned Sessions Judge disbelieved the complainant as an interested witness, with two previous convictions, as stated by him in para. 13 of his judgment. Further, as the...
Tag this Judgment!Baban Alias Madhav Dagadu Dange Vs. Parvatibai Dagadu Dange
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1978
Reported in: (1978)80BOMLR305; 1978MhLJ604
Apte, J.1. The short question that arises in this petition filed by the original opponent is whether the expression 'mother' used in Section 125(1)(d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (No. 2 of 1974), (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') includes 'adoptive mother' as well.2. The petitioner was adopted as a son by respondent No. 1 in 1948 after the death of her husband.3. The respondent No. 1 filed an application under Section 125 of the Code for the monthly allowance by way of maintenance on the allegation that her adopted son-the present petitioner, had neglected and refused to maintain her although on adoption he had secured substantial property in his adoptive family and was, therefore, possessed of sufficient means.4. The adopted son resisted the application raising various contentions all of which are not relevant for the purpose of this petition, since only one has been pressed before us. His principal contention was that the respondent No. 1 being his adoptive mother w...
Tag this Judgment!Keshav Dattu Patil Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-08-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Bom289
Deshpande, J.1. The appellant is the owner of survey No. 218 situated at Sangli measuring 18 acres and 23 gun-thas. Half of the said survey number has been acquired by the Government, the respondent. In due course, the Land Acquisition Officer passed his award on 30-9-1966. It appears that for some reasons not relevant for the disposal of this appeal, the appellant was absent at the time of the pronouncement of the award. A notice of the award was served on him on 6-10-1966. The appellant then made an application for a copy of the said award. The said copy was ready on 22-10-1966. The appellant then made an application for reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act on 30-11-1966. The reference was then made in due course and came up for trial before the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Sangli. Necessary issues were framed by him. He upheld the claim of the appellant in which he had claimed a sum of Rs. 40,000/- as additional compensation over and above what was awarded t...
Tag this Judgment!Praveen Dalpatrai Desai Vs. Gangavishindas Rijharam Bajaj
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-08-1978
Reported in: (1978)80BOMLR100; 1978MhLJ646
Naik, J.1. This revision application is filed challenging the order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, dated March 15, 1977 setting aside the order of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 23rd Court, Esplanade, Bombay, dated August 27, 1975, by which the learned Magistrate had passed an order of discharge in favour of the accused-revision petitioner under Section 245(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.2. The facts giving rise to this revision application are briefly these: The accused-revision petitioner Praveen Desai is a Managing Director of what is known as 'Advent Corporation Pvt. Ltd.' In that capacity he had constructed a building called 'Advent' at 12-A, Foreshore Road, Bombay. In 1962, the accused wanted to construct another building known as 'Divyaprabha' on a vacant portion of the plot on which the Advent building was standing. The complainant Bajaj intended to purchase one of the flats in the proposed building. An agreement to that effect was entered i...
Tag this Judgment!Mohamad Ismail Ansari Vs. E.S.i.C. Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-07-1978
Reported in: (1979)IILLJ168Bom
Deshpande, J. 1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the summary dismissal of the appellant's appeal under S. 82 of Employees' State Insurance Act of 1948 (referred to hereinafter as 'the said Act') challenging the order of the Judge, Employees' Insurance Court, Bombay, dated 26th September, 1974, in Application No. 23 of 1973. There is not much dispute about the facts. The appellant was employed as a skilled fitter in 'B' grade with the Premier Automobiles Limited with effect from 14th April, 1959. On 21st November, 1972, the appellant met with an accident, while he was still discharging his duties. He was admitted to the hospital on 24th November, 1972 and discharged on 8th December, 1972. He was again admitted in another hospital and discharged on 22nd December, 1972. He got a fitness certificate on 27th February, 1973 and then reported for duty on 1st March, 1973. He then set up his claim for disablement benefit to which he is entitled under S. 46(1)(c) of the Act before...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›