Mumbai Court May 2008 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.
imtiyaz HussaIn Mumtiyaz Sheikh Vs. the State of Maharashtra Through M ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-2008
Reported in: (2008)110BOMLR1645
F.I. Rebello, J.1. The Appellant herein has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 364, 302 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. and consequently sentenced to life imprisonment as also to pay fine as set out in the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai in its order dated 17th June, 2003. At the outset the learned Counsel submits that he is not challenging the conviction of the Appellant under Section 302 and Section 364 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The Appellant who has preferred this Appeal has moved this Application being Criminal Application No. 420 of 2008, contending that he is 'Juvenile in conflict with law' and consequently the sentence imposed on him will have to be considered in terms of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 with the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Amendment Act, 2006, which hereinafter referred to as the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 and Juvenile Justice Ame...
Krishna S/O Sadashiv Kale, Vs. Bhagwan Natthu Kale and Vithobaji S/O H ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)ALLMR529; 2008(3)BomCR513; 2008(4)MhLj663
C.L. Pangarkar, J.1. This is an appeal by the original plaintiffs. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to as plaintiffs and defendants. 2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows - The plaintiffs and defendants are resident of Shivangaon. The defendant owns and possesses Khasra No. 95 and 97 of Shivangaon. Original defendant Raghoji was the owner of the suit property. He was an old man. He did not either have a wife or the children. He was, due to old age, unable to cultivate the land personally. He was, therefore, unable to derive enough income from the fields. He, therefore, wanted to sell the suit property. He therefore entered into an agreement of sale of two fields in favour of the plaintiff for consideration of Rs. 16000/-. The plaintiffs paid Rs. 5000/- to the defendants towards earnest. The sale deed was agreed to be executed on 20/2/1982. The plaintiff submits that he was always ready and willing to take the sale-deed and to pay the balance of the considerati...
The State of Maharashtra Through the Land Acquisition Officer Vs. Sant ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)ALLMR324; 2008(3)BomCR715; (2008)110BOMLR1707; 2008(5)MhLj52
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. In exercise of the powers conferred under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Government of Maharashtra decided to acquire lands at Village Deshmukhwadi, Taluka Khed, District Pune, for Bhama Askhed Project and thus issued a notification under Section 4 of the Act that provision on 18th June, 1994 which was published on 30th June, 1994. This notification was issued in furtherance to the letter issued by the , Pune, on 16th January, 1993 to acquire these lands for Bhama Askhed Project. In compliance with the provisions of the Act, declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 8th January, 1998 whereafter the Special Land Acquisition Officer(SLAO), after hearing the claimants and considering the evidence produced on record made his award on 31st July, 1997, awarding following compensation to the claimants.(a) Group I @ Rs. 25,000/- per hector.(b) Group II @ Rs. 29,000/- per hector.(c ) Group III @ Rs. 32,0...
Mr. Jinu P. Philip Vs. Annie Varghese W/O Mr. Jinu P. Philip
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)BomCR824; (2008)110BOMLR1660; 2008(4)MhLj866
Ranjana Desai, J.1. Rule. Respondents waive service. By consent of the parties, taken up for hearing forthwith. 2. The appellant is the original respondent-husband and the respondent is the original petitioner-wife in Petition No. A-361 of 2007, which was filed in the Family Court No. 3, Pune at Pune. For the sake of convenience, we shall refer to them as the appellant- husband and the respondent-wife. 3. A petition was filed by the respondent-wife for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 22 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 (for short, 'the said Act'). The case of the respondent-wife was that she and the appellant-husband were married on 11/12/2003 at Pune under the provisions of the said Act. Both the parties are Christians by religion. It was a love marriage. The appellant- husband had not informed about this marriage to his parents. It is the case of the respondent-wife that notice of the marriage was given in September, 2003. After the marriage, which took place on 11/12/2...
Geenu Rakesh Khurana Vs. Badjate and Company and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)BomCR542
Lavande A.P., J.1. Heard Mr. J.M. Gandhi, learned Counsel for the applicants and Mr. Bhattad, learned Counsel for respondent No. 1. None appears on behalf of respondent No. 2.These applications have been preferred by the applicants under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code' for short) challenging common order dated 24.1.2008 passed by the 3rd Aditional Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Criminal Revision Nos. 779/07, 780/07 and 781/2007.Respondent No. 1 herein filed Criminal Case Nos. 5874/05, 5873/05 and 5875/05 against the applicants herein alleging offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The matters were adjourned from time to time. After the arguments were concluded two applications purporting to be under Sections 91 and 311 of the Code were filed by the applicants-accused in the criminal cases seeking recalling of witnesses and direction to produce certain documents. Learned Magistrate dismissed the ap...
Sayyed Salim Sayyed Yusuf and ors. Vs. Hrushikesh Pralhad Patil and or ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)BomCR544
1. By the above Letters Patent Appeals, the appellants who are the original respondents in Writ Petition Nos. 4995 of 2007 and 4996 of 2007 have challenged the order dated 28.2.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge by which order whilst admitting the petitions, the learned Single Judge has granted interim reliefs in terms of prayer Clause (C) of the petitions which reads as follows:(C) Pending hearing and final disposal of this writ petition, grant stay to the impugned judgment and order dated 7th August, 2007, passed by learned District Judge-2, Aurangabad in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 25 of 2007, and for that purpose, issue necessary orders.As stated hereinabove the appellants are the original respondents in the said Writ Petitions 4995 of 2007 and 4996 of 2007. The said Writ petitions have been filed by the respondent No. 1 to the above Appeals, challenging the order passed by the lower Appellate Court i.e. the learned District Judge, Aurangabad in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 25 of 2007 by...
Pudumjee Pulp and Paper Mills Kamgar Sangh Vs. Pudumjee Pulp and Paper ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)BomCR668; [2008(118)FLR123]; (2008)IIILLJ215Bom; 2008(4)MhLj768
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. The petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 23rd April, 2008 passed by the Industrial Court at Pune declining to accede to a prayer for interim relief. The dispute relates to the action of the employer by which a General Secretary of the Union came to be suspended and a domestic enquiry was commenced. On 18th February, 2008 a notice to show cause was issued to the workman by the management recording that on 16th February, 2008 at 8.40 a.m. he had summoned a co-workman by the name of Kalpanarayan Yadav who was in service since 7th January, 2008 and threatened him against reporting for work from the next day failing which, the worker was informed, that serious consequences would ensue. The management called upon the General Secretary of the Union to show cause. Immediately upon receipt of the letter, the General Secretary, by his reply dated 18th February, 2008 stated that the issue relating to workers coming from other States into the State of Maharashtra was ca...
Margappa Shethappa Vadar Vs. Proctor and Gamble India and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-2008
Reported in: 2008ACJ2802; 2008(4)BomCR820; 2008(4)MhLj922
Abhay S. Oka, J.1. This appeal gives rise to a very interesting question. The said question is, whether a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal can grant compensation on a claim petition filed by father of a foetus or a still-born child in the womb of a mother on account of loss of foetus as a result of an accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle.2. It will be necessary to refer the facts and circumstances of the case in brief. The accident occurred on 28-1-1992. The wife of the appellant/claimant came to be knocked by a car owned by the first respondent which was validly insured with the second respondent. The appellant's wife succumbed to the injuries sustained in the accident. It is the case of the appellant that his wife was carrying at the time of accident and there was a 28 weeks of old foetus in her womb. The involvement of the vehicle owned by the first respondent is not in dispute. The fact that the vehicle concerned was insured with the second respondent is also not in dispu...
Ashoka Buildcon Ltd. Vs. Maharashtra State Road Development Corporatio ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)ARBLR288(Bom); 2008(5)MhLj67
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. By this order, I will dispose of the above petition filed by the petitioner under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The necessary facts are that, the Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation Ltd. has invited offers for collection of toll. In response thereto, the petitioner has submitted his offer. This offer was accepted by the respondent and the petitioner was awarded the contract for collection of toll on Daund Phata Road S.H. 67 near Daund R.O.B. in Pune District and near Bhima Bridge in Ahmednagar District. According to the petitioner, the respondent committed breach of the terms and conditions of the tender and because of political pressure, illegally terminated the contract in favour of the petitioner and encashed the performance Bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner in favour of the respondent. On 3rd September, 2003, the claims raised by the petitioner were referred to the Claims Settlement Committee. A meeting was hel...
Hindustan Antibiotics Ltd. Vs. Pramodini Rohidas Sutar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)BomCR908; [2008(119)FLR649]; (2009)IILLJ84Bom; 2008(5)MhLj949
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. The controlling authority has directed the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 1,30,823/- towards the dues on account of gratuity together with interest at the rate of 7% per annum with effect from 1st February, 1997. The order of the controlling authority has been confirmed by the Appellate Authority on 5th February, 2008.1A. The submission which has been urged on behalf of the petitioner is that the first respondent opted for voluntary retirement with effect from 31st January, 1997 and during the course of her employment she was provided with residential quarters. Since the first respondent did not vacate the residential quarters, proceedings were instituted under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971. An order was passed by the Estate Officer on 26th May, 2005 against the first respondent against which an appeal filed before the competent Court at Pune was dismissed. The first respondent vacated the quarters on 16th June, 2005. The ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›