Mumbai Court June 2002 Judgments
Crown Frozen Foods Vs. Silver Frozen Foods and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-24-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALLMR208; 2002(6)BomCR771
D.G. Karnik, J. 1. The respondent filed a Suit No. 2631 of 2001 against the applicants in this Court after obtaining an ex parte leave under Clause XII of the Letters Patent on 22-6-2001. The petition for leave under Clause XII of the Letters Patent was not numbered by the office. I am informed that in July 2001, when the leave was granted the prevalent practice in this Court was to present the petition (under Clause XII of the Letters Patent) directly to the Chamber Judge, who after hearing the plaintiff's Counsel ex parte either granted or refused the leave. It was only from 27-2-2002, when the directions were issued by Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.A. Patil that the practice of presenting the leave petition to the Chamber Judge directly was discontinued and the petitioner is now required to present the petition in the office which after numbering is placed before the Court. However, practice of granting leave ex parte and without notice to the defendants is still continued. 2. The applicant...
Tag this Judgment!State of Maharashtra Vs. Narayan S/O Kanhyasingh Chavan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-24-2002
Reported in: (2002)104BOMLR871
V.K. Barde, J.1. This appeal is against acquittal filed by the State. The respondent was prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 16(1) and (2) r/w Section 7(i) r/w Rule 44(e) of the Food Adulteration Act.2. The case of the prosecution is as follows :On 26.7.84 Food Inspector visited the M/s. Laxmi Bhavan Hotel at Nanded alongwith panchas. There was a tin containing oil, he enquired with the respondent about the oil and he told that it was ground nut oil. 450 gm. oil was purchased as sample by the Food Inspector and then it was divided in three equal parts and kept in three dry, clean bottles. The sample bottles were sealed as per the Rules. Necessary documents were issued to the respondent. The bottle of sample thereafter sent for analysis to Public Analyst and the Public Analyst reported that the sample was not of the groundnut oil but a mixture of oils. Hence he obtained the permission for prosecution and criminal case was filed, it was numbered as Criminal Case No. 50/19...
Tag this Judgment!State Bank of India Vs. Jayram Sitaram Pedhamkar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALLMR360; 2003(2)BomCR195; 2002(4)MhLj10
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J. 1. Heard Advocates for the parties. Perused the records. 2. The applicant challenges the order dated 8.12.1998, whereby the Trial Court has allowed the applications filed by the respondents for setting aside the order of sale of machineries and shed as well as lifting of the attachment thereof and further to restrain the applicant from seeking to execute the decree of the Trial Court by attachment and sale of the said machineries and the shed. 3. Pursuant to failure on the part of the respondents to pay the loan amount which was borrowed from the applicant, Special Civil Suit No. 180 of 1993 came to be filed in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ratnagiri, by the applicant against the respondents for the recovery of the said amount and the said suit was decreed by judgment and decree, dated 5.2.1996, and accordingly the respondents were directed to pay a sum of Rs. 2,22,895.90 ps. to the applicant-Bank with interest at the rate of 18% per annum on the pr...
Tag this Judgment!Divisional Controller, M.S.R.T.C. Vs. Jagannath S/O Krishnarao Gawande
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-2002
Reported in: (2002)4BOMLR68; [2003(96)FLR37]; 2002(4)MhLj48
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. The respondent is working as a helper in the Divisional Workshop of M.S.R.T.C. at Akola. A departmental enquiry was convened against the respondent on the charge that he had submitted false medical bills to the applicant. The bills were paid by the applicant. According to the applicant, these medical bills were found to be bogus on enquiry. A charge-sheet was issued to the respondent on 26-3-1993. A criminal complaint had also been lodged with the police on 22-2-1993 and an offence was registered under sections 419, 420, 463 and 469 of Indian Penal Code as Crime No. 106 of 1993. The respondent filed a suit being Reg. Civil Suit No. 441 of 1993 before the learned 2nd Joint Civil Judge. Jr. Dn., Akola. In the said suit, an interim injunction was prayed for restraining the applicant from holding the departmental enquiry against the respondent until the decision of the criminal case in respect of Crime No. 106 of 1993 registered with the police station, Civil Lines, ...
Tag this Judgment!Madan Ganpatrao Babar Vs. Kshetrapal Finance Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALLMR371; 2002(4)MhLj495
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J. 1. Heard Advocates for the parties. Perused the records. 2. The applicant challenges the order, dated 27-7-2000, passed by the II Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Sangli in Special Civil Suit 142 of 2000, answering the issue pertaining to lack of territorial jurisdiction to entertain the said suit in the affirmative, the trial Court by the impugned order has directed the return of the plaint for the purpose of presentation thereof in a Court having jurisdiction to entertain the same. The issue regarding lack of territorial jurisdiction was answered in the affirmative on two grounds, namely (i) that the respondent has no subordinate office at Sangli, and (ii) Clause 16 of the agreement between the parties provides for the jurisdiction of the Courts in Belgaum for any dispute arising out of or under the agreement between the parties. 3. The applicant obtained a loan of Rs. 2,50,000/- from the respondent for the purchase of a mini bus and the said loan was grant...
Tag this Judgment!Kolhapur Zilla Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh Ltd. Vs. State of Maharasht ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-2002
Reported in: (2002)IIILLJ707Bom
1. This petition is filed by the petitioner, Kolhapur Zilla Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh Ltd., for several reliefs prayed in the prayer clause of the petition.2. The case of the petitioner-Society is thatit is a Co- operative Society registered underthe Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act,1960 and conducting its business in accordancewith law. The grievance of the.petitioner-society is that the provisions of theMaharashtra Mathadi, Hamal and OtherManual Workers (Regulation of Employmentand Welfare) Act, 1969 ('the Act', for short)have not been properly implemented by therespondent-authorities. The resultant effect isthat the business of the petitioner-Society hassuffered. Several directions, therefore, weresought by the petitioner against the respondent-Board, State of Maharashtra as well as againstother respondents.3. In our opinion, the questions sought to be raised and agitated in the present proceedings would not be appropriately dealt with and decided in exercise of extraordinar...
Tag this Judgment!Chandrakant Yeshwant Pardeshi and anr. Vs. Laxminarayan theatres Pvt. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)BomCR588
A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. This writ petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, takes exception to the judgment and decree passed by the IV Additional District Judge, Pune dated September 12, 1986 in Civil Appeal No. 403 of 1984. 2. The subject matter of the present petition is property bearing Survey No. 1256/2-A of final Plot No. 621/2-A admeasuring about 1100 sq.ft. situated at Pune. The said property was originally owned by one Vasundhara Gharpure. The said Vasundhara Gharpure leased the open plot of land to the original petitioner No. 1 Chandrakant Yeshwant Pardeshi by a written lease deed dated 9th August, 1950 (Exhibit 58) for a period of 20 years. The subject property was subsequently purchased by the respondents herein on 15th March, 1972 by a registered sale deed from the said Vasundhara Gharpure. The respondents accordingly became the owners of the property but the said Chandrakant Yeshwant Pardeshi continued to occupy the property. It is relevant to note that thou...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Dattatraya Kumathekar Vs. Padmavati Ashok Kumathekar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)BomCR749
N.V. Dhabholkar, J. 1. Heard Shri Pallod, Advocate for petitioner. None appeared for respondent. 2. The revision petition arises out of the order passed on 31-3-1995 by Civil Judge S.D. Sangamner in R.D. No. 1/1995. It appears that in H.M.P. No. 40/93 the said Court passed an order of interim maintenance/alimony in favour of respondent wife at the rate of Rs. 150/- per month. Regular Darkhast was filed for recovery of an amount of Rs. 3,000/- towards interim alimony for the period 27-4-1993 to 26-12-1994 and further for the amount of Rs. 218.15 ps. towards the costs of execution proceeding. By application dated 31-3-1995, the wife prayed for attachment from salary of petitioner serving with Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation at Khed (Rajgurunagar), District Pune and the learned Judge has issued attachment by the impugned order, which reads as follows: 'Issue attachment warrant in respect of salary of the opponent as prayed for under Order 21, Rule 48 of C.P.C.' 3. Advocate Sh...
Tag this Judgment!Pandurang S/O Narayan Pandit Vs. Pundalik S/O Shamrao Satav
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-2002
Reported in: (2004)106BOMLR739
R.S. Mohite, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. Rule is made returnable forthwith by consent of the parties.3. This Civil Revision Application, which has been filed by the original defendant landlord, challenges an order below Ex. 8 in Small Causes Suit No. 18 of 1999, which is an order passed below an application for staying the proceedings in the suit, purported to be filed under Section 10 of the Civil Procedure Code.4. It is an admitted position that the defendant landlord was granted permission by the Rent Controller, which was confirmed in appeal and writ petition, in this regard is admitted and pending before the Single Judge of this Court. In the meanwhile, the defendant landlord filed a suit for eviction and possession along with recovery of arrears of rent. In this suit, the defendant filed the application at Ex. 8 for staying of proceedings on the ground of pendency of writ petition in this Court. It appears that this application has been allowed by the impugn...
Tag this Judgment!Gopal Kisan Jadhao Vs. State of Maharashtra Through P.S.O.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-2002
Reported in: 2003BomCR(Cri)578; (2002)104BOMLR59
V.M. Kanade, J.1. The Appellant is charged under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for having committed the murder of Annapurna by dousing her in kerosene and burning her. The Trial Court has convicted the Appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer R. I. for life and also a fine of Rs. 100/- in default to suffer further R. I. for 1 month.2. The prosecution case is this, that Annapurna was the daughter of Mankarnabai w/o Ukarda Sonone and was residing in Ambedkar Nagar, Akola. In January, 1996, she was residing in the same locality with her two daughters and husband. Deceased Annapurna though was married, was residing with her mother as she had come from her matrimonial house on account of illness. Annapurna's husband used to reside at Khamgaon.3. The case of the prosecution is that the appellant/accused Gopal Kisan Jadhao was also the resident of the same locality. He had a sister-in-law viz. Mangala. Deceased Annapurna used to work as a domesti...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »