Mumbai Court September 2002 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.
Kondiba S/O Dattarao Mirashe Vs. the State of Maharashtra,
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-12-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALLMR951; 2003(2)MhLj432
D.G. Karnik, J.FACTS:1. The Nanded Municipal Council, which has beenconverted into Municipal Corporation with effect from25th March 1997, runs several schools within the city ofNanded. The Divisional Revenue Commissioner and theRegional Director of Municipal Administration,Aurangabad, under which fell the Municipal Council,Nanded, was pleased to accord sanction for creation of 3posts of Head Masters alongwith certain other posts ofAssistant teachers, Peons, Chowkidars, etc. in theprimary schools run by the Municipal Council, Nanded,vide letter dated 16th June, 1984. The qualificationsrequired for the post of Head Master of the school aslaid down in the said letter was B.A. B.Ed. Thepetitioner who possessed the required qualification ofB.A. B.Ed. was selected and appointed as Head Master ofSangamwadi primary school run by the Respondent No. 4 on18th June, 1984. The Deputy Director of Education, whois the Respondent No. 2 herein, on 6th February, 1991granted approval to the appointment o...
Asian Paints (i) Ltd. Vs. Jaikishan Paints and Allied Products
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-12-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALLMR637; 2002(6)BomCR1; (2002)4BOMLR941; 2002(4)MhLj536
S.J. Vazifdar, J.1. As the order in each of the Notice of Motion require to be prefaced with the facts, it would be convenient to deal with them by a common order.2. Notice of Motion No. 2884 of 2001 was taken out by the plaintiff for interim reliefs.The defendant took out Notice of Motion No. 309 of 2002 for dismissal of the suit on the ground that this Court has no territorial jurisdiction and for an order returning the plaint under Order 7, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In this Notice of Motion the defendant has also prayed that the plaintiff be refused leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent. The defendant is at liberty to urge this contention in the plaintiffs application for leave under Clause XIV of Letters Patent.Notice of Motion No. 315 of 2002 has also been taken out by the defendant to vacate the ad-interim order dated 27th November, 2001 passed by this Court.However, as Notice of Motion No. 2884 of 2001 is being finally heard it is not necessary to decide thi...
Dattu Gopalrao Nakhate Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-12-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)31; 2003BomCR(Cri)703; 2003(1)MhLj60
R.K. Batta, J. 1. The appellant was tried for rape of prosecutrix, aged about 8 years, under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. In support of the said charge, the prosecution had examined six witnesses. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur vide judgment dated 12-8-1998 held the appellant guilty for the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years as also to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for four months. The appellant was in custody since 16-10-1997 and he was given benefit of set off from that date, under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal procedure. The appellant has challenged the said conviction and sentence in this appeal. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the appellant called the prosecutrix to his house by offering peppermint. Accordingly, she went to the house of the appellant where he was alone. Appellant removed the under-wear of the prosecut...
Superintending Engineer, P.W.D. and ors. Vs. Kokan Sarvajanik Bandhkam ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-12-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALLMR114; 2003(3)BomCR228; [2003(96)FLR1106]; 2003(1)MhLj86
R.J. Kochar, J. 1. The Superintending Engineer, P.W.D. Ratnagiri and District Sindhudurg are the petitioners aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order dated 20th January 1995 passed by the Industrial Court, Kolhapur in Complaint ULP No. 335 of 1989 filed by the respondent union under section 28 read with section 30 and Items 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the M.R.T.U. and PULP Act, 1971.2. According to the respondent union, it represented the workers of the public works department employed under the aforesaid petitioners, who were impleaded in the complaint as respondents. It was further averred by the union that the concerned workers were governed by the Kalelkar award in respect of their service conditions. The said Kalelkar award determines the service conditions of the workers working in the public works department at various places or districts under different projects. The said Kalelkar award has been in force from 1966. Under the said award the PWD workers or the staff were entit...
Mohammad Ismail S/O Karim Patel Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-12-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ1324; 2003(1)MhLj623
R.K. Batta, J. 1. The appellant was tried for possession of 87.500 gms of brown sugar worth Rs. 87,500/-, under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short, the 'NDPS Act'). The prosecution case, in brief, is that on prior information which was reduced into writing in the Station Diary, the police party along with panchas, went near Kamalbaba Durgah, Nagpur and accosted the appellant from whose personal search, 12.500 gms of brown sugar valued at Rs. 12,500/- was recovered besides cash of Rs. 9758/-. After the said recovery, the appellant was interrogated and he disclosed that he would point out brown sugar in the house and accordingly, he was taken to the house and from a cupboard, he took out one polythene packet as also cash. The said polythene packet contained 75 gms of brown sugar besides a sum of Rs. 2800/-. The samples were taken and forwarded to the Chemical Analyser who reported that heroin (diacetyl morphine) is detected in both the samples.2. ...
J.S. Mishra Vs. Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-12-2002
Reported in: 2003(4)ALLMR213; 2003(1)BomCR509; 2003(1)MhLj589
S.A. Bobde, J.1. This petition is directed against an order dated 20-11-1996 by which the Education Officer has held that respondent No. 2 Joshi is senior in service to the petitioner-Mishra. Petitioner's seniority has been fixed in category 'C' of the Schedule 'F' to the Rules framed under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules 1981 (hereinafter, called as the Rules) with effect from 28-11-1998. This is the date on which the petitioner's degree of Senior Hindi Shikshak Sanad has been recognised as a qualification for teacher in category 'C.2. The facts in brief are :The petitioner was appointed on 13-7-1970 as an Assistant Teacher in respondent No. 4's school. His qualifications were B. Com. with Senior Hindi Shikshak Sanad.3. The respondent No. 2-Joshi was appointed as an Assistant Teacher on 2-8-1976. His qualifications were M.A. B.Ed.4. According to the law in force then, i.e. the Secondary Schools Code, the following categories of teacher existe...
Shrirang Dharmaraj Kale Vs. Najmunissa A. Rahimbee Shaikh and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-12-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)ALLMR51; 2003(2)BomCR621; (2003)2BOMLR369; 2003(1)MhLj638
A.M. Khanwilkar, J. 1. These Writ Petitions under Article 227 take exception to the Judgment and decree dated 3-4-1989 of the 5th Addl. District Judge, Solapur in Civil Appeal No. 259 of 1987. The premises in question consists of one verandah and two rooms admeasuring 10' x 10' and 15' x 12' which forms portion of CTS No. 6995, House No. 96 at Siddheshwar Peth, Solapur. The suit structure consists of total 14 rooms out of which the suit premises referred to above were in possession of tenant Shrirang Dharmaraj Kale. The petitioners in Writ Petition No. 3917/89 and Respondents in the companion Writ Petition 3439 of 1990 are the successors of the said tenant, (hereinafter referred to as 'tenant'). The said tenant was inducted in the suit premises by the predecessor of the respondents in Writ Petition No. 3917/89 and petitioners in Writ Petition No. 3439/90 (hereinafter referred to as 'the landlord'). 2. The respondents instituted suit for possession of the suit premises against the tenan...
Bandu Ravji Nikam Vs. Acharyaratna Deshbushan Shikshan Prasark Mandal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-12-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR198; 2003(3)BomCR210; 2003(3)MhLj472
A.M. Khanwilkar, J. 1. This Writ Petition takes exception to the Judgment and decree passed by the 2nd Additional District Judge Kolhapur dated 21-4-1989 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 408 of 1984. The premises in question consists of two rooms out of CTS No. 7 E-Ward, Kolhapur. The said premises were let out to the petitioner as a monthly tenant by the erstwhile landlord. The subject land and structures thereon were purchased by the respondent, which is undisputedly a Public Charitable Trust. The tenancy was attorned in favour of the respondent. The respondent in engaged in espousal of education and is presently running a college in the suit property in the name of 'Mahavir College'. The respondent trust required the suit premises for occupation for the purposes of the activity of the trust; for which reason, the petitioner was requested to vacate the suit premises. Since the petitioner did not respond to that request, the respondent instituted suit for eviction and possession of the sui...
Pune Municipal Transport Vs. Subhash Shankarrao Khupase
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-12-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)BomCR664; [2003(97)FLR952]
R.J. Kochar, J.1. The Pune Municipal Transport is aggrieved by the impugned Awards and orders passed by the Labour Court in reference I.D.A. No. 108 of 1988. By Part I Award, the Labour Court has held the enquiry held against the respondent conductor vitiated and illegal and improper. The Labour Court also held that the findings were perverse. After recording the said findings on 22nd January, 1991, the Labour Court proceeded further with the matter by allowing the petitioner to adduce evidence to justify its action of dismissal of the respondent workman. It appears that the petitioner adduced evidence by examining the checker of the bus viz., Shri Baig to justify its action of dismissal. The respondent workman did not enter into the witness box either before the Labour Court or before the Enquiry Officer. The Labour Court appears to have not been satisfied with the enquiry and the findings of the Enquiry Officer and also with the evidence adduced by the petitioner before the Labour Co...
Pune Municipal Transport Vs. Shankar Laxman Awati and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-12-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR34; 2003(1)BomCR514; [2003(97)FLR1071]
R.J. Kochar, J.1. The petitioner, Pune Municipal Transport is aggrieved by the orders passed by the Labour Court dated 13th September, 1994 and the order passed the Industrial Court in revision application on 28th September, 1995. Both the courts below have recorded concurrent findings of facts against the petitioner. Both the courts have directed reinstatement of the respondent driver with full backwages and continuity of service. Even before this Court, the order of reinstatement found favour and, therefore, on 7th February 1996, the petitioner was directed to re-instate the respondent workman. It appears that the rule was restricted to the question of backwages to the tune of Rs. 1,44,000/- out of which the petitioner appears to have deposited a sum of Rs. 50,000/- in the Industrial Court, Pune. 2. The respondent joined the services of the petitioner as a driver on 1-11-1971. He was dismissed from service on 17-2-1984 for the alleged acts of misconducts that he had gone to the resid...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »