Mumbai Court June 1996 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.
Economic Development Corporation of Goa, Daman and Diu Limited Vs. Sun ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-1996
Reported in: 1997(3)BomCR299
ORDERR.K. Batta, J. 1. The work of construction of office building complex was entrusted by the petitioners to respondent No. 1 vide agreement dated 20th January, 1986. Dispute under the said agreement arose between the parties and arbitration clause was invoked. There was no agreement between the two Arbitrators and they referred the matter to the umpire. Before the Arbitrators question of jurisdiction was raised, but the Arbitrators came to the conclusion that they had jurisdiction to proceed with the matter. The matter twice came up before this court on accounts of orders passed by Civil Judge S. D. Panaji on application filed by respondent No. 1 under Section 33 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940. In the said application the petitioner had sought declaration that reference of the disputes between the parties to arbitration was without jurisdiction, null and void. The petitioner also prayed for declaration that the Arbitrators had no jurisdiction to arbitrate on the disputes. The p...
Diners Club India Ltd. and ors. Vs. Rajguru M.S. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-1996
Reported in: [1996(74)FLR2082]; (1998)IIILLJ934Bom
M.B. Shah, C.J.1. Against the notice dated 27.8.1990 issued by the First Labour Court, Bombay informing the Petitioners why proper action under Section 48 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practice Act should not be taken against the Petitioners this Criminal Application is filed. 2. It is submitted that on the interim application filed by the Maharashtra General Kamgar Union in Complaint (ULP) No. 730 of 1990 the Industrial Court, Bombay on 12.7.1990 passed the following order :- 'Status quo ante be maintained this order is passed after hearing both the sides.' Thereafter on 21.8.1990 M. S. Rajguru, the Respondent No. 1 filed Criminal Miscellaneous Complaint (ULP) No. 101 of 1990 under section 48 of the Act before the Labour Court alleging that the Petitioners have committed the breach of the status quo order passed by the Industrial Court. Therefore, they should be punished under Section 48 of the Act. 3. At the time of hearing of this App...
Yoginath Damodhar Bagde Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-1996
Reported in: 1996(4)BomCR226; [1996(74)FLR2073]; (1998)IIILLJ865Bom
Jhunjhunuwala, J. 1. By this petition filed under Articles 226 and 277 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to quash and set aside the order dated 8th November 1993 by which the Petitioner has been dismissed from service. The petitioner also seeks to quash and set aside the charge-sheet dated 22nd May 1992 and dissenting findings of the Disciplinary Committee of this Court. The petitioner also seeks reinstatement in service with full back wages and continuity of service and other ancillary benefits such as seniority, promotion, increments, etc. 2. The petitioner was working as Additional District and Sessions Judge, Amravati when he was served with an order of dismissal from service on 8th November, 1993. The said order was passed as a result of Departmental Inquiry held against the petitioner on the charges that while working as lind Additional Sessions Judge at Wardha, the petitioner demanded Rs. 10,000/- from one Deepak Trimbakrao Deshmukh, Accused in Sessions Trial No...
Central Warehousing Corporation Through their Executive Engineer Vs. M ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)BomCR380
B.P. Saraf, J.1. This appeal is directed against the Judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 15th December, 1994 by which the learned Judge dismissed the arbitration petition of the appellant and made the award a rule of the Court and ordered decree in terms thereof.2. The facts of this case, briefly stated, are as follows: Pursuant to the tender enquiry made by the appellants, Central Warehousing Corporation, the respondents, M/s. M.S. Khurana, submitted a tender for construction of 50,000 MTC Godown Base Depot along with ancillary buildings like office blocks, chowkidar quarters, canteen blocks etc. water supply, electrical and sanitary installation and internal road at Central Warehouse, Khandawa. The tender of the respondents was accepted by the appellants and the contract agreement was executed on 15th November, 1978. The tender was for an amount of Rs. 1,19,93,726.02. According to the agreement, the work was to be completed before 23rd August, 1979. Due to various re...
The Maharashtra State Co-operative Marketing Federation Ltd. Vs. India ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)BomCR524
B.P. Saraf, J.1. An important and interesting question of law for consideration in these appeals is as to whether section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('C.P.C.') would apply to summary suits under Order XXXVII of the C.P.C.2. The facts of the case giving rise to this controversy, briefly stated, are as follows:A summary suit was filed by the Indian Bank (respondents herein) against the Maharashtra State Co-operative Marketing Federation Ltd. (appellants herein) for recovery of a sum of Rs. 4,96,59,160.25. It was filed on 6th February, 1992. In the said suit, a notice of motion was taken out by the original defendants (appellants herein) for stay of the trial of the above suit in view of the fact that the matter in issue in the said suit was also directly and substantially in issue in a suit previously instituted by the appellants against the respondents in this Court numbered as Suit No. 400 of 1991 which was pending. The case of the appellants was that the matter in issue i...
Shri Raghuvir Mhadu Naik S/O Late Mhadu Naik Vs. Shri Prakash Krishna ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)BomCR685
T.K. Chandra Shekhara Das, J.1. The plaintiff in Special Civil Suit No. 68 of 1993 on the file of Civil Judge, Sr. Division, Ponda is the appellant herein. The appellant challenges in this appeal, the order passed on 17-1-1994 in Civil Misc Appin. No. 196/93/A by the trial Court. By the impugned order, the interim application filed by the appellant before the Court below, seeking an interim mandatory injunction to demolish the construction that is being constructed by the first defendant in the suit property and also recovery of possession of the suit property was dismissed by the Court below.2. The Lower Court, taking into account the nature of the construction and the property being it belongs to the Communicate found that the petitioner has no locus standi to file the suit.3. Admittedly, the suit property belongs to the Communicate. The appellant is a component of the Communicate. He asserted that even as a component, when the Communicate is illegally meddling with the property of t...
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Mrs. Anuradha Ajit Malgaonkar an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-1996
Reported in: 1997(2)BomCR86
R.K. Batta, J.1. The short point for consideration in this revision is when an appointed Arbitrator under the Agreement neglects or refuses to act and the party serves a written notice to concur the appointment or in supplying the vacancy and the Arbitrator named in the Agreement foes not concur with the appointment, or nominate any other Arbitrator in terms of the Agreement within 15 days of such notice, whether the Court under section 8(2) can appoint an Arbitrator who shall have like power to act in the Reference and to make an award as if he had been appointed by consent of all parties.2. Facts giving rise to the said issue may now briefly be noted. The petitioners had entered into an agreement with respondent No. 1 vide Agreement dated 21-5-86 wherein respondent No. 1 was appointed as distributor in the sale of liquified petroleum gas within Ponda Muncipal limit for a period of ten years with effect form 25-10-86. Disputes arose between the parties and the petitioners terminated t...
The Comunidade of Curtorim and anr. Vs. Antonio Dias and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-1996
Reported in: 1997(3)BomCR297
T.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. The defendants in Special Civil Suit No. 2/90 filed this appeal. They challenge the order passed by the Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Margao, dated 14th February, 1994. By this order two applications have been disposed of by the Court below. One is Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 2/90 which has been filed by the plaintiffs for interim injunction restraining the defendants from demolishing or uprooting the plantation in the suit property or in any way interfering with the possession of the plaintiffs. Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 160/90/B was filed on behalf of the defendants praying to maintain status quo with regard to the suit property. Both these applications were disposed of by the trial Court by passing the order impugned in this petition. By this order Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 160/90 has been dismissed and the injunction sought by the plaintiffs in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 2/90 has been granted.2. The lear...
Mrs. Ana Colaco Vs. Thomas Colaco
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-1996
Reported in: 1997(3)BomCR305
R.K. Batta, J.1. The petitioner (plaintiff in the suit) had claimed in the suit filed by her that there existed traditional passage from her house through the property of respondent (defendant in the suit) to go to Chorao/Bicholim road. The trial Court had granted injunction in favour of the petitioner, but the same was reversed by the learned Additional District Judge, Mapusa which is subject matter of challenge in this revision. 2. The short point to be decided in this revision is prima facie existence of traditional access as claimed by the petitioner. Learned Advocate Shri N. Sardessai submitted before me that the respondent permanently resides in Bombay and comes to Goa only during vacation; that the injunction in favour of the petitioner is operative since 2-4-91 to date; that though admittedly no sketch of the traditional passage had been filed by the petitioner, yet the respondent did file sketch showing the traditional access claimed by the petitioner; that the trial Judge had...
Smt. Mala Gurudas Gaude, Major and anr. Vs. Smt. Laxmi Rama Gaude and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-1996
Reported in: 1997(3)BomCR308
T.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. The defendants in Special Civil Suit No. 118/92 on the file of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ponda, have filed this Appeal being aggrieved by an interim order passed by the lower Court on 1st November, 1993. By the impugned order, the appellant was restrained from alienating the suit property. It also ordered that the plaintiffs, namely the respondents herein could enjoy the house which is included in the subject-matter of the suit. 2. It is the case of the plaintiff/respondent Rama Gauda that he was the original tenant of the suit property and he was residing with his family in the suit property alongwith his wife and children. Since Rama Gaude died, the plaintiff No. 1 is the widow of Rama Gaude and the plaintiff No. 2, the second son of the deceased Rama Gaude. Defendant No. 1 who is the widow of the deceased Gurudas Gaude, the first son of Rama Gaude, became entitled to the property. The defendant No. 2 is the minor daughter of Gurudas. It is also...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »