Mumbai Court December 2004 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.
State of Maharashtra and anr. Vs. Prabhakar S. Thakur
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)BomCR35; 2005(1)MhLj658
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. By consent heard forthwith.2. The respondents are aggrieved by the order dated 7-8-2004 and consequential order dated 4-9-2004 passed in Pension Lok Nyayalaya in Pension Matter No. 3 of 2004. The petitioner before the Pension Lok Nyayalaya was a retired employee of respondent No. 2. It was pointed out before the Lok Nyayalaya on behalf of the petitioner that no decision had yet been taken for extending the benefit of pension scheme to the employees of MHADA and that Government had appointed M/s K. A. Pandit to ascertain exact amount likely to be involved which the Chartered Accountant worked out to be 20.49 crores. That report was yet to be considered by the Government. It was also pointed out that the petitioner No. 2 herein cannot independently take decision on its own as the implementation of pension scheme involve huge financial burden and hence, the approval of the State Government is necessary and essential. The Lok Nyayalaya in Paragraph 4 of the earlier...
A.R. Subrao and the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Hemanti Satis ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005ACJ1244
Nishita Mhatre, J.1. The present First Appeal arises out of the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal granting compensation to the Respondent-claimants. The trial Court had granted an amount of Rs. 223,000/- together with interest @ 9% per annum.2. The facts involved in the present case are as follows:A motor taxi bearing No. MRO-9590 was proceeding along the national highway from Pune to Mumbai. Respondent No. 1 is the wife of the deceased. Respondent No. 2 is the son of the deceased and Respondent No. 3 is the father of the deceased. The husband of Respondent No. 1 and the father of the other respondents was seated in the taxi on the left rear seat. The taxi collided with the goods truck bearing No. MYA-9751. Both the vehicles were proceeding in the opposite directions and the accident occurred on the national highway. As a result of the collision, the passengers on the left side of the taxi including the deceased Hanumant Sinkar and one Satish Bhide who was sitting in the fron...
Prem Kumar Upadhyay Vs. Air India Ltd. and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)MhLj711
F.I. Rebello, J.1. The petitioner was served with charge-sheet dated 15-5-1990. In the charge sheet it was alleged that the petitioner being a staff member applied for and was authorised a staff concessional air passage Bombay/Delhi/Bombay against which he was issued on 15-1-1988 a ticket No. 098-403062 against payment of Rs. 356/-. It was then alleged that the petitioner passed on the said ticket to one Mr. Mohan Lal, Advocate, who has approached him to obtain for himself a full fare ticket of Rs. 2170/- which was to be defrayed from the several loans advanced to him by Mohan Lal earlier. The said Mohan Lal was not happy to receive a staff concessional passage ticket issued to the petitioner in lieu of the desired full fare ticket. Said Mr. Mohanlal reported the matter to the respondent company whereupon the petitioner paid Mr. Mohan Lal the sum of Rs. 1850/- leaving a balance of Rs. 320/- to be paid, and collected the said ticket back.It was then alleged that on further investigation...
Harish Sitaram Chourasia and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)BomCR592; 2005(2)MhLj608
Lavande A.P., J.1. By this appeal, the appellants take exception to the judgment and decree dated 13-3-1992 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Gondia, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 21 of 1990, allowing the appeal filed by the respondents against the judgment and decree dated 1-1-1990 passed by the Civil Judge, Sr. Dn., Gondia in Regular Civil Suit No. 106/89.2. The facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are as under :The appellants herein filed the above mentioned suit against the respondents for recovery of arrears of rent to the tune of Rs. 49,400/- in respect of the suit house let out to the defendants. The plaintiffs filed the said suit on 15-7-1987. The plaintiffs claimed interest at the rate of Rs. 1.75% p.m. During pendency of the suit, the defendants paid the arrears of rent to the plaintiffs on 21-1-1988. Thereafter, the suit was partly decreed and the trial Court awarded interest @ 6@ p.a. on Rs. 49,550/- from the date of filing of the suit i.e. 15-7-1987...
Nilkanth S/O Krishna Thakre Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)MhLj103
K.J. Rohee, J.1. By this petition Under Article 227 of theConstitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,the petitioner seeks quashing and setting aside the Order dated 6-10-2001 passedby Additional Sessions Judge, Gondia, in Sessions Trial No. 76/2000 directingaddition of the petitioner as co-accused for the offences punishable UnderSections 201, 204 and 218 of Indian Penal Code.2. The brief facts are that the petitioner was working as Police Station Officer, Amgaon. He was investigating officer in Crime No. 107/2000 for the offence punishable Under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code and Crime No. 108/2000 for the offence punishable Under Sections 302 read with 109, 147, 148, 149 and 343 of Indian Penal Code. It seems that after investigation, charge sheets were filed and both the cases were committed to the Court of Session.3. During the pendency of Sessions Trial No. 76/2000, the Additional Public Prosecutor moved an application under section 319 of the ...
Ramesh S/O Rasiklal Suchak Since Deceased by His Lrs. Pushpa Ben Wd/O ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)MhLj629
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. At the outset it needs to be stated that this writ petition was finally disposed of on 4th August, 2000 by this Court with a direction of remand to appellate Court on the point of admissibility of partition deed which is in dispute between the petitioner/tenant and respondent/landlord. The contentions with regard to the bona fide requirement of respondent/landlord were kept open. This judgment was challenged in L.P.A. No. 94 of 2000 by the respondent/landlord and grievance made was that there was no need to remand the matter back and the Division Bench after noticing that the partition have been litigating since the year 1976, held that the learned Single Judge should have proceeded to examine the matter on merits instead of remanding it. The Division Bench requested the Single Bench to dispose of the writ petition expeditiously preferably within the period of three months, that is how the matter started again and it was listed before this Court on 1-11-2004. T...
Keith Nazareth Vs. Miriam Dossa
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)ALLMR299; 2005(5)BomCR832
Britto N.A., J.1. These are plaintiffs second appeals.2. The parties hereto shall be referred to in the names as they appear in the cause title of the suits.3. The plaintiff is the owner of a property known as 'Maddem' having land registration No. 29031, Matriz No. 2290 surveyed under No. 114/5 with a house in it, situated in Umtawaddo of Calangute village.4. The plaintiff by virtue of an agreement dated 24-9-1976 let out to defendant No. 1 the said house as per the plan attached with compound at the back of the house and a strip of land which went up to the seashore; on payment of a monthly rent of Rs. 775/-. The lease was for a period of 22 years from 1-4-1976, for the purpose of running a guest house. Considering the nature of the business, it was agreed between the parties that rent would be Rs. 425/- per month for the first year and with a proportionate increase of Rs. 50/- every subsequent year. Clause 9 of the said deed, which is most relevant, reads as follows :-'The lessee sha...
Communidade of Morombi O Grande Vs. Jose Autonio Rodoilo Acuaviva Brag ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(3)MhLj443
B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. This appeal arises from the Judgment and Order dated 4-9-1999 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Sr. Division, at Panaji in Special Civil Suit No. 91/81 which was filed for declaration and mandatory injunction, as well as mesne profits in respect of the property situated at Morombi O Grande. The suit was instituted by the appellant-Communidade of Morombi O Grande. Defendant No. 1 is the father of defendant No. 3 Angelica and defendant No. 4 Egidio. Defendant No. 2 is the second wife of defendant No. 1 and stepmother of defendants No. 3 and 4. The first wife of defendant No. 1 and the mother of defendants No. 3 and 4 died on 22-5-1963.2. The suit property which was alleged to have been encroached upon by the father of defendant No. 1 sometime in 1946 or thereafter was shown as bounded by letters L, M, N, O, P, Q, B, A, H, G, I, J, K and L and it admeasured 1,44,340 sq. metres. The plaintiff Communidade who was otherwise holding agricultural land in Survey No. 218/1...
A.R. Subarao and anr. Vs. Shalini Hanumant Sinkar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 3(2005)ACC622
Nishita Mhatre, J.1. The present first appeal arises out of the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal granting compensation to the respondent-claimants. The Trial Court had granted an amount of Rs. 1,47,000/- together with interest at the rate of 9 percent per annum.2. The facts involved in the present case are as follows:A motor taxi bearing No. MRO 9590 was proceeding along the national highway from Pune to Mumbai. Respondent No. 1 is the wife of the deceased. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are the children of deceased and respondent No. 4 is the fattier of the deceased. The husband of respondent No. 1 and the father of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 was seated in the taxi on the left rear seat. The taxi Collided with the goods truck bearing No. MYA 9751. Both the vehicles were proceeding in opposite directions and the accident occurred on the national highway. As a result of the collision, the passengers on the left side of the taxi including the deceased Hanumant Sinkar and one Satish Bhid...
Jaslok Hospital and Research Centre Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2006(199)ELT583(Bom)
ORDERR.M. Lodha, J.1. Heard Mr. V. Shreedharan the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B.A. Desai, the learned Additional Solicitor General for the respondents.2. The petitioner obtained Customs Duty Exemption Certificate (CDEC) for import of various hospital equipments under Notification No. 64/88-Cus. The CDECs certified the petitioner covered by the para 2 of the hospitals specified in the table annexed to the Ministry of Finance notification No. 64/88-Cus., dated 13-1-1988. The said CDECs were cancelled/withdrawn by the Director General of Health Services on 14-11-2000 on the ground that the petitioner failed to fulfil the conditions of para 2(b) of the aforesaid notification. The petitioner then made a representation to the Minister of Health and Welfare on 24-9-2003 for categorisation of the petitioner under para 1 of the table of the said notification. The said representation came to be rejected by the Director General of Health Services vide order dated 18-3-2004. In the...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »