Mumbai Court December 2007 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.
Shaikh Jaffar S/O Shaikh Ahmed Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Through P ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-20-2007
Reported in: (2008)110BOMLR249; 2008CriLJ2413; 2008(4)MhLj713
V.R. Kingaonkar, J.1. Heard. 2. By this common order, I shall dispose of group of applications for bail, filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in connection with Crime No. 160/2007 registered at Kranti Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad.3. Applicants, named hereinabove, have been arrested for commission of an offence punishable under Sections 376, 342 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. Some of the applicants are Police Officers, some of them are said to be mere customers and some of them are said to be involved in the act of immoral trafficking. 4. On basis of report lodged by minor girl, viz., Puja, the offences were registered. She narrated to the Police as to how she was induced to enter into flesh trading by a brothel keeper named Shamim Tabassum @ Baji. The prosecutrix was born out of second marriage of her mother -Sunita with one Sahebrao Mhaske. Said Sahebrao Mhaske died and thereaft...
Rangubai Wd/O Bhanudas Saudar and ors. Vs. Ramkrishna Abaji Jadhao
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-20-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALLMR401; 2008(2)BomCR122; (2008)110BOMLR268
C.L. Pangarkar, J.1. The appellants/defendants, who lost in both the courts below have preferred this second appeal. 2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are as under The subject matter of the suit is 7 acres out of gat No. 91 of village Sawargaon Teli in Buldhana district. Defendant No. 1 is the mother of defendant nos.2 to 5. Defendant No. 1's husband and defendants No. 2 to 5's father had sold the said field to the plaintiff on 7/1/1955. The said field has been in possession of the plaintiff since then continuously. However, in the year 1986-87, the defendants illegally took possession of the suit field from the plaintiff. The plaintiff, therefore, instituted suit for possession and damages. 3. The defendants resisted the suit and denied that they have forcibly taken possession of the suit field. Their contention is that Bhanudas . the deceased had borrowed a sum of Rs. 500/-from the plaintiff. He could not repay that amount. Since he could not repay the amount of Rs. 500/-, the ...
Mallaya Bapenna Mekkalwar Vs. Rajboina Bhemmaka W/O Hanamantoo and ors ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-20-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALLMR21; 2008(2)BomCR151; 2008(3)MhLj886
C.L. Pangarkar, J.1. Both these appeals are preferred by the original defendant No. 2, who lost in both the courts below. 2. The facts giving rise to the appeal are as under Plaintiff No. 1 is the wife of defendant No. 1 while defendants No. 2 to 4 are the sons and daughters of defendant No. 1. The marriage between plaintiff No. 1 and defendant No. 1 took place 25 years ago. Since 10 years prior to institution of the suit the plaintiffs have been residing with the father of plaintiff No. 1. The defendant No. 1 has not been providing anything to them for their maintenance. Plaintiff No. 1 is, however, maintaining plaintiff nos.2 to 4. Defendant No. 1 has totally neglected the plaintiffs. Plaintiff No. 1, therefore, had instituted a Criminal case under Section 125 of the Cr.P. Code against defendant No. 1 and the court was pleased to grant maintenance of Rs. 50/-per month to plaintiff No. 1. Defendant No. 1 has not even paid this maintenance to the plaintiffs. Defendant No. 1 owned Surve...
i.T.C. Limited Vs. G.T.C. Industries Ltd. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-20-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)BomCR132; (2008)110BOMLR259; 2008(2)MhLj922; LC2008(1)194
Anoop V. Mohta, J.1. The present appeal filed by the appellants (Original Petitioners) against the judgment and order dated 5th July, 2002 passed in Miscellaneous Petition No. 42 of 1995, whereby, an order dated 19 December, 1994 of the Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks, by which the respondents have been permitted to register the trade mark 'MAGNUM' in class 34 in respect of Cigarettes, bidis, safety matches, cigars, smokers and other articles as contemplated, on the application filed by the respondents under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 (for short, 'the 1958 Act'), has been maintained and the Miscellaneous Petition filed by the Appellants was dismissed.2. The relevant dates and events are as under.:3. The appellants are manufactures inter-alia of Tobacco and or Tobacco products including cigarettes.4. On 23/12/1987, respondent No. 1 filed an application for registration of Trade Mark 'MAGNUM' which was proposed to be used in respect of cigarettes, bidies etc. as contemp...
Dadasaheb Arjun Gulve Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-20-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)BomCR712
D.G. Karnik, J.1. In all these writ petitions, the petitioners have challenged the constitutional validity of Section 5-B of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (for short 'MMC Act'), section 5-B of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 (for short 'BPMC Act'), Section 9-A of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (for short 'Municipalities Act'), Section 12-A of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis act, 1961 (for short 'Zilla Parishads act') and Section 10-A in the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1950 (for short 'the Village Panchayats Act'). In the alternative, counsel for the petitioners submitted that the time limit of four months prescribed for production of a caste/tribe validity certificate by the second proviso to each of the aforesaid sections should be held to be directory.2. Since all the petitions raise common questions of law and challenge the constitutional validity on the same grounds...
Gulf Air Vs. Canara Bank and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-20-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)MhLj233
D.G. Karnik, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 1st March, 2000 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court transferring Motion No. 2838 of 1999 in Suit No. 4751 of 1994 filed by respondent No. 1 to the Debt Recovery Tribunal.2. The appellant (original defendant No. 5) is an Airline Company to whom the goods in question were given for transportation. Respondent No. 1 is a nationalised bank and the original plaintiff. It filed a suit, bearing Suit No. 4751 of 1999, for recovery of money on the original side of this Court. The respondent No. 2 is the original defendant No. 1. It is a partnership firm of which respondent Nos. 3 to 5 (original defendant Nos. 2 to 4) are partners. Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 (original defendant Nos. 5 and 6) are the agents of the appellant. For the sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred with reference to their original status (plaintiff or defendants) in the suit.3. The relevant facts are that the defendant...
Catalyst (India) Private Ltd. a Company Registered Under the Indian Co ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-19-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)BomCR43; (2008)110BOMLR1; [2008(116)FLR926]; 2008(3)MhLj911
B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. This petition filed by the Company impugns the award passed by the 1st Labour Court at Thane on 30/3/1996 in Reference (IDA) No. 46 of 1987 and though the petition is claimed to have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, having regards to the reliefs sought for, it is being treated as the one filed under Article 227 of the Constitution. Respondent No. 2 stands deleted forthwith.2. The petitioner is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and was engaged in the manufacture of Vanadium Pentoxide Catalyst and certain products ancillary thereto. It is contended that on account of recession in industry, resulting in a continuous decline in the orders by the customer companies and on account of facing accumulation of finished goods, the company found several workmen surplus to its requirement and consequently, it found the need to reduce the number of workmen and more particularly those from the helper category. Initially it had resorted to lay-...
Priyanka Omprakash Panwar Vs. the State of Maharashtra Through Its Pri ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-19-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALLMR13; 2008(2)BomCR100; 2008(1)MhLj715
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. The Petitioner appeared for the Common Entrance Test conducted by the State Government for admission to Medical Colleges in the State in May 2002 and sought admission to the M.B.B.S. Degree Course on the basis of a claim to belong to the Khatik Community which is notified as a Scheduled Caste in the State of Maharashtra. On 24th June 2002. the Petitioner was granted admission to the Mahatma Gandhi Mission Medical College at Navi Mumbai on a reserved seat on the basis of a Caste Certificate granted by the Deputy Collector, Thane. The Caste Certificate was forwarded to the Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Konkan Division, Mumbai for verification. By an order dated 27th February 2004, the claim of the Petitioner to belong to the Khatik Community was invalidated. The decision of the Scrutiny Committee was challenged by the Petitioner in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. By an order dated 7th March 2005, a Division Bench of this Court c...
Smt. Shyamabai W/O Shriram Sharma (Since Deceased), Vs. Ramkisan S/O P ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-19-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)ALLMR189
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This First Appeal by original Defendant is challenging the judgment and decree dated 5th May 1992 delivered by 6th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division Court, Nagpur by which it decreed the Special Civil Suit No. 660 of 1989 filed by present Respondent for specific performance. Deceased Appellant No. 1 was original Defendant No 1 in said Suit and present Appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are subsequent purchasers from her impleaded therein later on by the Respondent. During pendency of this Appeal, Appellant No. 1 expired and remaining Appellants contended that she expired without leaving any legal heir and they are prosecuting present Appeal as subsequent purchasers in possession. 2. The case of Respondent Plaintiff is that on 5/10/1986 an agreement was reached with present Appellant Defendant by which she agreed to sell a house property at Nagpur for total consideration of Rs. 3,01,000/-only (i.e. Three lakhs One thousand only) and received earnest amount of Rs. 5,000/-(F...
Santosh S/O Mithu Morale Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-19-2007
Reported in: (2008)110BOMLR343
Naresh H. Patil, J.1. By this appeal, the appellant challenges the judgment and order of conviction and sentence for an offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'I.P.C.') to undergo imprisonment for life. The judgment was delivered by the learned Sessions Judge, Beed in Sessions Case No. 51 of 2005, on 31/01/2006.2. In brief, the prosecution case is that the appellant was husband of deceased Rajubai, who was married with the appellant about 2 years prior to the date of incident. According to prosecution, an amount of Rs. Sixty Thousand was offered on account of dowry along with three Tolas of gold during the marriage. The deceased used to come to her parental home occasionally for festivals. At the time of Mahashivaratri, the deceased was brought to her parental home by her father. At that time, she disclosed that the appellant was not on talking terms with her. The parents of the deceased persuaded her to pull on while assuring her that everything wou...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »