Mumbai Court June 2006 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.
Prakash Boolu Kundar Vs. Shankar Aithu Poojari
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-22-2006
Reported in: 2006(5)BomCR127; 2006(5)MhLj453
Khanwilkar A.M., J.1. Heard Counsel for the parties. Perused the relevant documents on record.2. Admit. Mr. Anturkar waives notice for respondent.3. As short question is involved, Appeal is taken up for hearing forthwith, by consent.4. This Appeal from Order takes exception to the Judgment and Order passed by the Joint District Judge, Pune dated November 18, 2005 in Arbitration Petition No. 960 of 2002 filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act1). The lower Court was pleased to pass the following order :ORDER1. The opponent is restrained from interfering in the day to day management of the business of the firm and shall not with draw amount from account of the firm, until the decision of the dispute before arbitrator and till award is put up for execution.2. The opponent is permitted to visit the Durga Restaurant & Bar which is the place of business of the firm.3. The applicant shall maintain accounts of the business of the f...
Ramlal Devappa Rathod and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-22-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ3689
J.N. Patel, J.1. This appeal is filed by the appellants, original accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7, 10, 12, 29 and 30 challenging their conviction and sentence in Sessions. Case No. 134 of 2000 vide judgment and order dated 6th October, 2001 passed by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur.2. The appellants-accused came to be tried with other 26 accused persons on a charge of having committed offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 302, 307, 326, 324, 395, 427, 436, 435, 452 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. In nutshell it was the prosecution's case that the accused and the victims are the residents of Sevalal Nagar, Tal. North Solapur. The deceased-Tanaji Pandurang Rathod and his relatives were the trustees of Durgamata Temple in the village and were also the members of one Sahakari Krushi Society which has received 44 acres of agricultural land from the Government. There were various litigations, civil and criminal, going on between Tanaji Pandurang Rathod, his famil...
Hari S/O Ramji Vs. Mahadu S/O Kerba Tekale Died Through Lrs. Shivaji M ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-22-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Bom327; 2006(6)MhLj110
S.B. Deshmukh, J.1. This Second Appeal No. 244 of 1985 is directed against the judgment and decree passed in Regular Civil Appeal No. 389 of 1983 by the leardned District Judge, Nanded on 29th October, 1985. Learned District Judge, Nanded held that due to failure of the plaintiff to deposit the balance amount of the sale consideration within the time stipulated by the trial Court, the suit, after the expiry of the given period automatically, stood dismissed. The learned District Judge, Nanded further held that the appeal thus, became infructuous and is, therefore, disposed of accordingly, in the light of the matter, without disturbing the judgment and decree of the trial Court.2. The facts, in short, may be summarised, as follows:(a) The appellant, in the second appeal, was the plaintiff in Regular Civil Suit No. 270 of 1982 and one Mr. Mahadu S/o Kerba was the defendant in the suit. Defendant Mahadu Kerba died during the pendency of second appeal, in this Court, and his legal heirs ha...
Shri Virendra K. Mehta and Shri Vs. Acit 13(2)
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-2006
Reported in: (2007)109TTJ(Mum.)30
1. These three appeals have been filed by the assesses against the order of CIT(A) arising from the order of AO passed under Section 143(3) for the assessment years 2000-01 and 2001-02. Appeal in ITA No.2992/M/03 had been heard before us on 21/06/2003 and appeals in ITA Nos. 5450 & 5451/M/2004 have been heard by us on 29/06/2006. AR and DR submitted that the arguments in the appeal in ITA No. 2992/M/03 may be considered in the other two appeals also, the issue being the same. The solitary effective ground urged in the three appeals is the same; to the effect that the CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the action of AO in disallowing the claim for depreciation under the provisions of Section 32 in respect of motor car and/or motor cycle used for the purpose of business, by the appellants who are partners of the same firm. AR sought our consideration to the facts of the case, as per the orders of AO and CIT(A) in ITA No. 2992/M/03, which are as follows: 2. Appellant is a partner ...
Keru Govinda Jondhale (Since Deceased by Heirs Smt. Janabai W/O Keru J ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-2006
Reported in: 2006(5)BomCR599; 2006(5)MhLj357
B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. This petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution arises from the order dated 10th March 1981 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Karvir Division, Kolhapur in Tenancy Case No. 8 of 1975 instituted under Section 84 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (for short 'the Tenancy Act') and duly confirmed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal vide its judgment and order dated 24/9/1982 in Revision Application No. 91 of 1981. 2. The brief undisputed facts relevant are that the agricultural land in revised Survey No. 341 and admeasuring 15 Acres and 11 Gunthas of village Top in Hatkanangale Taluka of Kolhapur District was owned by late Shri Mohamad Mohiddin Patel who left behind him six sons and one brother i.e. respondent Nos.1 to in the present petition. The said land was being cultivated by three different tenants viz. Keru Govinda Jondhale, Dadu Govinda Jondhale and Rama Sakharam Khot and each of them was in separate possession of 1/3rd share ...
Ramesh S/O Daulatrao Pachghare and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-2006
Reported in: 2006(44)MhLj15
D.D. Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned AGP for the respondents.2. The counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in the instant case, after the notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act is published, the petitioners have taken objections to the acquisition of land. It is submitted that petitioner Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are the owners of Survey No. 28/1, admeasuring 2.58 hectare. Petitioner Nos. 4, 5, 6 and 7 are the owners of Survey No. 28/2, admeasuring 3.26 hectare. Petitioner No. 8 is the owner of Survey No. 30/3A, admeasuring 1.49 hectare. Petitioner Nos. 9, 10, 11 and 12 are the owners of Survey No. 33/4, admeasuring 1.88 hectare and petitioner Nos. 13, 14 and 15 are the owners of Survey No. 34/1, admeasuring 1.27 hectare. All these lands are situated at village Palaswada. It is contended that the owners of these survey numbers have submitted separate objections in respect of the acquisition proceedings initiated by the Special Land A...
Virendra Shankarrao Gonge and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-2006
Reported in: 2006(5)BomCR93; 2006(44)MhLj17
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioners-employees of respondent No. 2-Punjabrao Krishi Vidyapeeth, working as Senior Research Assistants have sought deletion of condition of five years experience imposed for getting pay-scale of Rs. 680-1250 in the same cadre.2. It is not in dispute that all the petitioners are duly qualified and have been selected as Senior Research Assistants on the basis of Post Graduate Degree i.e. M.Sc. (Agriculture) held by them. It is stated that before pay revision, as per recommendations of Bhole Pay Commission's Report, the pay scale of Senior Research Assistants was Rs. 275-480 and that of Desk Officer was Rs. 260-430. The pay scale of Desk Officer after 1976 has been revised to Rs. 600-1150. The pay scale of Senior Research Assistants stood revised to Rs. 500-900 initially and thereafter to Rs. 550-900 from 1-5-1981. The higher pay scale of Rs. 680-1250 was provided for those Senior Re...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Miss Indira Rai and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)BomCR397; 2006(44)MhLj378
ORDERH.L. Gokhale, J.1. Heard Mr. Suresh Kumar for the petitioners. Mr. R.G. Walia appears for the respondent No. 1. Other respondents are served.2. This petition filed by the Union of India for Central Railway seeks to challenge the order dated 19-2-2001 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai, in Original Application No. 570 of 2000 which was filed by the respondent No. 1 and which came to be allowed by the Tribunal.3. The respondent No. 1 was working as an Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerk ('ECRC' in short) in Central Railway. She along with many others including respondent Nos. 2 to 4 appeared for the selection test to the post of Console Operator. The conditions of eligibility for the candidates permitted the candidates to be from two different pay scales i.e. Rs. 1600-2660 (RPS) and Rs. 1400-2300 (RPS). The candidates, of course, had to be ECRC to apply for that post.4. When the test was held and marks were given, the respondent No. 1 stood at position No. 1 over the ot...
Nayyar P. Siddiqui Vs. Sant Gadgebaba Amravati University
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)BomCR238; 2006(44)MhLj322
D.D. Sinha, J.1. Rule is made returnable forthwith by consent of Parties.2. Heard Mr. Haq, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Khade, the learned Counsel for the University.3. This writ petition is directed against the communication dated 22-9-2005 issued by the Deputy Registrar, (Ph.D.Cell), Sant Gadgebaba Amaravati University, Amaravati whereby the petitioner was communicated that the treatise for the Degree of Doctor of Literature in the faculty of Arts was disapproved.4. Mr. Haq, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner submitted her treatise for award of degree of Doctor of Literature on the topic 'English and Urdu Poetry: A Parallel Literary Study' for the English subject in the faculty of Arts. The treaties was referred to the examiners appointed by the Board of Examination. The reports of Examiners were considered by the Board of Examination and Management Council and was recommended to the Academic Council for necessary decision. The...
Brijlal Kalyanji Bhate and ors. Vs. Municipal Council and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-2006
Reported in: 2006(6)ALLMR155; 2006(5)BomCR430; 2006(6)MhLj183
Dharmadhikari B.P., J.1. The petitioners Nos. 1 to 3 claimed themselves to be owners of Field Survey Nos. 96/3 and 98/2 of Mouza - Khamgaon within Khamgaon Municipal Town limits of Khamgaon Municipal Council and they contended that in lieu of permission granted to them to develop open space in the sanctioned layout, they surrendered the land for 60 ft. wide D.P. Road after its reservation had lapsed. However, later on Municipal Council has revoked that permission and hence said revocation is illegal. The prayer is to permit them to develop the open spaces. It is also their contention that after permission to develop was accorded, they have created third party interest in favour of petitioners Nos. 4 and 5. Respondent No. 1 in the present matter is Municipal Council, Khamgaon through its Chief Officer while respondent No. 2 is the Planning Authority functioning under provisions of Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act (hereinafter referred to as MRTP Act). We are also concerned wit...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »