Mumbai Court September 1999 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.
Bahadur Singh Alias Amar Bahadur Singh Vs. Umarkadi Co-op. Housing Soc ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-08-1999
Reported in: (2000)102BOMLR638
H.L. Gokhale, J.1. Heard Mr. Kini for the petitioner and Mr. Punwani for the Respondent.2. Mr. Punwani had filed a reply on behalf of the respondent which is taken on record.3. The petitioner had tried to canvass before the Appellate Court and has also tried to canvass before me that the property wherein the particular room is situated belongs to the Bombay Diocesan Trust. He has not traced his authority to occupy the concerned room through this Trust nor has he produced any document of the Trust nor has he led any evidence in that behalf. He does not dispute that he is occupying the particular room as an employee of the respondent No. 1 society. This being the position, it is totally irrelevant as to whether the property is owned by the said Trust inasmuch as his possession was through t the society which has terminated his right to occupy the room. He has no authority to continue. The courts below have therefore correctly granted the decree to the society. There is no reason to inter...
Arun S/O Tukaram Patil Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)BomCR419; [1999(82)FLR573]; 1999(3)MhLj594
ORDERB.N. Srikrishna, J.1. Rule returnable forthwith. Respondent No. 1 and 2 waive service through Shri Deshpande, Assistant Government Pleader, respondent No. 3 waives service through Shri Bade, Advocate. By consent rule called out and heard.2. This writ petition is directed against an order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT), dated 15-1-99, made in Original Application No. 99/98 by which the selection and appointment of the petitioner as Police Patil in village Motala was set aside.3. The petitioner came to be appointed as Police Patil of village Motala on 29-12-97 after following the required procedure sometime in March 1998. The third respondent challenged the appointment of the petitioner before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal by Original Application No. 99/98. The Maharashtra Village Police Patils (Recruitment, Pay, Allowances and other Conditions of Service) Order, 1968 provides the criteria for eligibility for appointment as Police Patil in Rule 3. Rule 3(...
Shri Dattaram Prabhu Vs. the Director of Panchayats and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALLMR607; 2000(2)BomCR716; 2000CriLJ4190
ORDERY.K. Sabharwal, C.J.1. Rule returned forthwith with the consent of the parties.2. For the present purpose, the facts which we would notice here in under briefly-He in a very narrow compass.3. On the complaint of Shantaram Naik, proceedings were initiated against the petitioner under the Goa Public Men's Corruption (Investigations and Inquiries) Act, 1988, for short, 'the Act'. The Final Report submitted by the Commission under the Act, is Exhibit 'E' dated 24th March, 1999. It has been rendered by the Chairman and a Member of the Commission. The said Final Report inter alia states that as the petitioner is no more Sarpanch no order under section 18 of the Act is to be made. The recommendations made in terms of the Final Report dated 24th March, 1998, are:'(a) Criminal proceedings be instituted against the respondent and his accomplished (accomplices) in view of the misappropriation of funds of the Panchayat for offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act; (b) Civil ...
Dinkar Purushottam Dani Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALLMR704; 2001(1)BomCR91
N.J. Pandya, J.1. In respect of the Town Planning Scheme under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (for short 'M.R.T.P. Act') in the part of the city of Pune, on or about 10th July 1966, a plot bearing No. 104 belonging to the appellant came to be reserved for primary school. The plot admeasures 4160 sq. meters. The Pune Municipal Corporation was approached from time to time seeking permission to develop the property. Eventually when the request was denied a notice under section 49 of the M.R.T.P. Act came to be issues by the appellant on or about 6th February, 1971. The Government accepted the said notice on 28th July, 1971 i.e. within six months as stipulated under section 49 sub-section (4) of the M.R.T.P. Act, and acquisitioned the area of 2435.42 sq. meters only.2. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, referred to as the S.L.A.O., proceeded to determine the compensation amount, and as per the award, his offer to the owner was for Rs. 50/- per sq. meters.3. Not sat...
Shri Pandurang Maruti Sodhawar Vs. Shri Sayyad Faiyaj Badashahbhai and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1999
Reported in: (1999)101BOMLR692
R.M. Lodha, J.1. By this Writ Petition the petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by Civil Judge, Junior Division, Dound (Election Tribunal) whereby the concerned Tribunal ordered that there shall be scrutiny and recount of the votes before deciding the Election Petition under Section 15 of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958.2. The brief facts to the extent they are relevant and necessary for the disposal of the Writ Petition are:3. The election for Village Panchayat of village Boripardhi took place on 19th May 1995. From Ward No. 1 of the said village, 11 candidates contested the election, who are the Petitioner and Respondent Nos. 1 to 10 herein. The Returning Officer ultimately declared the present Petitioner Pandurang Maruti Sodanwar elected. His election has been challenged by Sayyad Faiyaj Badashahbhai Respondent No. 1 herein in Election Petition No. 2 of 1995 before the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Dound. In the Election Petition it has been averred by Sayyad Faiyaj B...
Smt. Shali Chandrakant Pilgaonkar and ors. Vs. Shri Gajanan Shankar Sh ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1999
Reported in: (2000)102BOMLR221
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. The following substantial questions of law arise for determination in this appeal:-(i) In a suit for specific performance, whether the averment concerning 'readiness and willingness' is a mere technicality or the same forms a part of substantive law, thereby going to the root of the maintainability of the suit?(ii) Whether the First Appellate Court could have refused to adjudicate on the issue of suit being undervalued merely on the basis of concession by the Advocate for the party, inspite of the fact that the Trial Court had rejected the plaint on the said ground.2. The undisputed facts in the case are that on 19th December, 1984 the original defendants by name Gopi Baban Naik and Kalyan Gopi Naik executed an agreement for sale with the respondent/plaintiff thereby agreeing to sell to the respondent an area of 24,200 sq. mts. of the property known as 'Vazem' situated at Shiroda bearing Survey Nos. 464/1 and 464/2 paying Rs. 10,000/- Rupees ten thousand only)...
Depot Manager, Madhya Pradesh State Transport Corporation and ors. Vs. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1999
Reported in: 2(2000)ACC124
A.B. Palkar, J.1. This appeal is filed against an order granting Rs. 15,000/- with costs to the claimants/petitioners as no fault liability under Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act.2. In this Court, Mr. Gowalkar, learned Counsel for appellants appeared. For respondents Mr. Lambat stated that now the claim petition has been decided and Rs. 60,000/- have been awarded including aforesaid amount of Rs. 15,000/-. The appeal is filed against the second order including the amount awarded towards no fault liability. It obviously means that negligence is said to have been proved.3. So far as no fault liability is concerned, it was not necessary to prove anything and, therefore, argument of learned Counsel for appellants that no evidence has been recorded, is of no assistance to the appellants. The matter was decided on affidavits and when nothing was required to be proved and the amount was awarded forthwith in the absence of any negligence being proved by the driver of the motor vehicle, a...
Vandana Vithal Mandlik Vs. Vithal Namdeo Mandlik
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALLMR183; 2000(2)BomCR640; II(2000)DMC515; 1999(3)MhLj898
ORDERV.K. Barde, J.1. The appellant filed Hindu Marriage Petition No. 17 of 1991 in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Aurangabad, for restitution of conjugal rights, under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. On establishment of Family Court at Aurangabad, the petition stood transferred to the Family Court, Aurangabad, and then was numbered A. 72/93. The learned Judge of the Family Court by her order dated 3-7-1993 dismissed the petition. Hence, the appeal. 2. The petitioner, Vandana, contended that she got married with respondent, Vithal, on 17-12-1987 at Aurangabad, as per Hindu rites and customs. After the marriage, the husband and wife cohabited for about 8 months at Borgaon Nandur (Taluka : Rahuri, District : Ahmednagar). At the instance of the family members, the respondent started to ill-treat her because she could not fulfil his demand of bringing money and gold articles from her parents.Her father fulfilled some of the demands but not to the satisfaction of the...
Sudhakar S/O Gangaram Bahale Vs. Madhukar S/O Ramrao Bhuibhar and Othe ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)ALLMR146; 2000(4)BomCR103; (2001)4BOMLR516a; 2000(2)MhLj249
ORDERJ.N. Patel, J.(Note: The learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 has filed a Pursis on 2-9-1999 stating that the respondent No. 1, namely, Madhukar Ramrao Bhuibhar, expired on 25-8-1999. The learned Counsel for the parties state that irrespective of the fact that the respondent No. 1 having expired on 25-8-1999, this petition will have to be disposed of on merits. In my opinion, the present petition requires to be considered on merits as election petitioner has died after the decision of the election petition in his favour and action survives.)1. The petitioner Sudhakar Gangaram Bahale seeks to impugn the order dated 29th September, 1998 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati, in Election Petition No. 6/Ele-Pet/ 144-T of 1996-97 of Akola, under which he has set aside the election of the petitioner (original respondent No. 3) and declaring respondent No. 1 (original petitioner), Madhukar Ramrao Bhuibhar, as elected member till the Managing Committee com...
Mahendra Anantram Choure and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-1999
Reported in: I(2000)ACC495; 2001ACJ1274
G.D. Patil, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Admit. Heard by consent finally.2. This civil revision application is directed against the order dated 28.4.1998 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur, dismissing the applicant's application for condonation of delay involved in filing a claim petition before the Tribunal.3. Undisputedly, on 10.2.96 the wife of the applicant Shashikalabai along with the applicant and their minor sons, applicant Nos. 2 to 4 were travelling by Nagpur-Tatanagar passenger train Ex. Tiroda to Raipur and during this journey the wife of the applicant had fallen down from the running train and ultimately died of the accident. The applicants, therefore, filed a complaint for compensation before the Railway Claims Tribunal. The claim was filed on 29.10.1997, though the limitation for filing the same was up to 10.2.1997. There was thus a delay of eight months and ten days for filing the claim. As such the application for condonation of delay was file...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »