Mumbai Court July 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.
Laxminarayan Vishwanath Arya Vs. the State of Maharashtra Through Seni ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-2007
Reported in: (2007)109BOMLR1583; 2008CriLJ1; 2007(4)MhLj7; 2008(1)AIRKarR465(FB)(Bom)
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. The legislative scheme behind the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 discerningly deciphers distinction of jurisdiction and field covered by the police or investigating agency on the one hand and the powers of the court while conducting inquiry or trial. Exercise of authority or jurisdiction by these two distinct components involved in the administration of criminal justice as provided under Chapter XII (Sections 154 to 176) and Chapter XIII to XV (Sections 177 to 203) is indicative. This legislative object of distribution of power without transgression on the limitation of the other has received judicial approval. With the development of law under criminal jurisprudence there is clear judicial dichotomy of investigative and judicial power. They operate in different fields without conflict and scope for overlapping, unless the provisions of the Code or judicial dictum have provided to the contrary. Despite passage of time such approach has prevailed with tenacity....
Mahadev Pandurang Kambekar (Since Deceased Through His Heirs and Legal ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALLMR360; 2007(5)BomCR726
D.K. Deshmukh, J.1. Both these Appeals challenge the same judgment of the learned single Judge of this Court passed in Suit No. 503 of 1980. That suit was filed by Shree Krishna Woollen Mills, where Mr.Mahadev Pandurang Kambekar was joined as a Defendant. (For the sake of convenience, in this judgment the parties are referred as Plaintiff and Defendant).2. The Plaintiff filed the suit for a decree of specific performance of the contract, where as in the same suit the Defendant filed a counter-claim seeking a decree of possession. The learned single Judge has decreed the claim of the Plaintiff and has passed a decree of specific performance in favour of the Plaintiff and has also allowed the counter claim and has passed a decree of possession in favour of the Defendant. Therefore, both the Plaintiff and the Defendant have challenged the judgment and decrees passed by the learned single Judge by filing these two Appeals. 3. Admittedly, the Defendant is the owner of the land being survey ...
Balmukund P. Parikh Vs. Administrative Council of Maharashtra Technica ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR473]; 2007(6)MhLj496
Nishita Mhatre, J.1. Dr. Balmukund Parikh, the original petitioner, has challenged the order of the College Tribunal passed on 29.10.1996 in Appeal No.12 of 1996(S). Unfortunately during the pendency of this petition, Dr. Parikh passed away on 23.10.2003. His heirs have now been brought on record and are prosecuting the present petition.2. The original Petitioner, Dr. Parikh, challenged his compulsory retirement by the respondents with effect from 9.4.1996. The appeal filed by him before the Tribunal was dismissed. Today, the heirs of Dr. Parikh do not wish to challenge the order of compulsory retirement but claim that the arrears of pension, provident fund, gratuity and leave encashment be paid to them on the basis that Dr. Parikh was compulsorily retired on 9.4.1996.3. Ms. Buch, appearing for the petitioner, submits that admittedly the original petitioner had not exercised his option for payment of pension under Death cum Retirement Gratuity scheme. She points out a Government Resolu...
Smt. Mukulika S. Jawalkar and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra Throug ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)BomCR853; 2007(6)MhLj368
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. 'Judge' is a generic term. The other terms like umpire, arbiter and arbitrator are only species of judge. A judge determines all matters of disputes and pronounces what is law, now as well as what will be law for the future, and acts under the appointment of the Government. Pollock C.B. Ex parte Davis (1857), 5 W.R. 523 said that judges are philologists of the highest orders. They are not mere administrative officers of the Government but represent the State to administer justice. His functions are to judge a cause and conduct trial according to the legal form and norms and give relief to the party. He does nothing for his own judgment or from a dictate of private will but he will pronounce according to the law and justice. Judex debet judiciary secundum allegataet probata, is a maxim which controls the functioning of a judge. The framers of the Constitution of India, to achieve the goal, stated in the preamble of the Constitution of India in regard to justice a...
Suresh Vishnu Lokhande Vs. Dattatraya Laxman Narute and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)MhLj98
Nishita Mhatre, J.1. All these petitions challenge the order of the School Tribunal dated 18.8.1998. The appeal before the School Tribunal was filed by the petitioner in Writ Petition No.1324 of 1999. The petitioner in Writ Petition No.1324 of 1999 Dattatray Laxman Narute (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'Narute') filed the appeal because he was aggrieved by the decision of the management, who is the petitioner in Writ Petition No.5770 of 1998, to promote the petitioner S.V. Lokhande in Writ Petition No.5786 of 1998 as Headmaster.2. The management had filed a Letters Patent Appeal after the order of the learned Single Judge rejecting its application for interim relief when its petition was admitted. The Division Bench in the Letters Patent Appeal on 7.4.1999 granted interim relief to the management and stayed the execution, operation and implementation of the impugned judgment and order dated 18.8.1998. As a result, Lokhande continued in service as a Headmaster. Today, Narute has...
Maharashtra Rajya Suraksha Rakshah and General Kamgar Union, a Registe ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-2007
Reported in: 2007(1)ALLMR645; [2007(113)FLR515]
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. In all the above 29 writ petitions on somewhat similar facts, the petitioners have claimed reliefs for (i) issuance of a writ, order or direction to the respondent-Security Guards Board to initiate action against the private employer-respondents under Section 42 of the Security Guards Act for contravening Clauses 13 and 25 of the Security Guards Scheme, (ii) directing the said respondent-Board to register the security guards listed in Exhibit-A to the writ petitions, and (iii) directing the respondent-employers to get themselves registered with the respondent-Board. In some of the writ petitions it is also prayed that the private employers be restrained from terminating the services of the security guards as listed in exhibits to the writ petition.2. The petitioners in some of the petitions are Unions registered under the Trade Union Act, 1926, while in other cases even the security guards have filed the writ petitions in their individual capacity. It is the cas...
Hamid Sh. Dawood Kagadi Vs. the Commissioner of Sales Tax and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)BomCR607
Swatanter Kumar, C.J. 1. The petitioner, who is employed in the office of the Commissioner of Sales Tax and is presently posted at D-1199, Ghatkopar Division, Navi Mumbai as Sales Tax Officer, submitted an application to the competent authority in his office on 11th April, 2007, requesting that the date of birth in his service record be changed on the basis of the evidence that he had furnished along with the said application. Having failed to receive any response to his representation, the petitioner made further representations to respondent Nos. 3 and 4 on 25th April, 2007, but of no consequence. This resulted in filing of the present writ petition wherein the petitioner has prayed for issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents directing them to change his date of birth in the service book and grant consequential benefits to him, including continuity of further services. 2. The relevant facts are that, according to the petitioner, he was born on 5th December...
Best Workers Union and Vs. the Best Undertaking and
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR118]; (2008)ILLJ1058Bom
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. Petitioner No. 2 claims to be a member and office bearer/representative of the Brihan Mumbai Electricity Supply and Transport Undertaking Workers' Union. He was elected as the President of the Union and was working as a Bus Controller. Petitioner No. 2 has put in 34 years of service. There was a strike in BEST Undertaking for one and half days from the mid-night of 18th April, 2007, to the evening of 20th April, 2007. The strike was peaceful. The Chairman of the respondents had made an appeal to the workers to withdraw the strike as they were assured that their demands would be considered and no action would be taken against any of the workmen. 2. The matter in relation to the strike and furnishing of undertaking was also questioned before the 6th Labour Court, Mumbai, which vide its order dated 23rd April, 2007, disposed of the matter requiring not to take undertakings from the workmen. However, vide order dated 27th April, 2007, petitioner No. 2 was placed und...
Exposure Insurance Services Ltd. a Public Limited Company Incorporated ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)BomCR440
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. This company appeal is directed against the order passed by the Learned Company Judge on 21st March 2007. The appellant company had filed a winding up petition against the respondent company on the ground that the respondent company is unable to pay its debts. The pleaded case of the appellant company is that it was holder in due course of two bills of exchange dated 15th December 2002 for an amount of US $ 2,165,000.00. They were endorsed in favour of the appellant company on 28th January 2003. The bills of exchange were payable on 15th March 2003. Thus the appellants invoked the jurisdiction of the Company Court on the basis of the endorsed bills. The respondents in their defence pleaded that nothing was payable in respect of the two bills of exchange as the supplier had issued two credit notes dated 27th February 2003 to the appellants; that the goods supplied had been received back and consequently there was no amount outstanding against the invoices and bil...
Zameer Ahmed Latifur Rehman Sheikh, Vs. the State of Maharashtra throu ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALLMR391; 2007(6)BomCR294
Ranjana Desai, J.1. Petitioner 1 is one of the thirteen accused in the case relating to serial bomb blasts which took place in the suburban trains of Western Railways on 11/7/2006, being MCOCA Special Case No. 21 of 2006. Petitioner 2 is one of the nine accused in the case concerning four bomb explosions which took place in the compound of Hamididya Masjid and Baba Kabrastan and nearby Mushawarat Chowk on 8/9/2006 being MCOCA Special Case No. 23 of 2006. Petitioner 3 is one of the nineteen accused in the case relating to seizure of arms in Aurangabad on 9/5/2005 and on some subsequent days, being MCOCA Case No. 16 of 2006. 2. In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India (for short, 'the Constitution), the petitioners have challenged the constitutional validity of that part of Section 2(1)(e) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (for short, 'the MCOCA') which refers to insurgency. For this purpose, we need not go into all the facts. It is, how...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »