Mumbai Court September 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.
Ratnakar Bhagwanrao Mahajan Vs. the District and Sessions Judge and th ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)MhLj312
1. Rule. Heard forthwith.2. The petitioner had joined as Bailiff in the District Court at Jalna. He was subsequently promoted to the post of Clerk and has rendered 25 years of service. The petitioner was transferred to the Jafrabad Court at Jalna district on 7.6.2004. The petitioner applied for voluntary retirement and was allowed to retire w.e.f. 6.9.2004 by order dated 30.8.2004. The petitioner on 27.9.2004thereafter submitted an application for withdrawal of the notice of voluntary retirement. That was rejected on 29.9.2004.3. After his retirement, show cause notice, as to why disciplinary proceedings should not be initiated, was served on the petitioner on 5.10.2004. That was based on a report of the JMFC, Jafrabad dated 1.9.2004 which was received in the office of District Judge on 3.9.2004.A consideration of the charge sheet which has been filed prima facie indicates that the charges are in respect of absentism and failure to take charge of muddemal and record section in his new ...
Sau. Parwatabai W/O Gokulprasad Yadav [In Jail] Vs. the State of Mahar ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-2008
Reported in: (2008)110BOMLR3369
A.H. Joshi, J. 1. The Appellant is accused in Special Criminal Case No. 22 of 1997 for offence under Section 20(b)(ii) A of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act.2. Police Inspector Mr. Pawade ordered to raid the house of the accused on getting secret information on 29th May, 1997.3. Police Sub-Inspector Tighare conducted the raid in presence of Police Inspector Mr. Pawade, Panch witnesses and Lady Police Constable Buckle No. 4222 Sushila.4. In the search of the house, twenty-five paper sachets of Ganja were found kept in a polythene bag [milk bag].5. On weightment, Ganja was found to be 85 grams. Samples were drawn for forwarding for analysis, and different packings were done. The Panchanama of raid was completed. Crime No. 96 of 1997 under Section 20 of the NDPS Act was registered.6. According to prosecution, compliances of all statutory requirements, such as Section 42 (1) and (2), Sections 50 and 57 are duly made.7. In the trial, two Panch witnesses have turned hostile. ...
Kashim Faridsaheb and Ramkrishna Laxmanrao Ambure Vs. Naseer Mohammad ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)BomCR361; (2008)110BOMLR3609; 2009(2)MhLj734
S.B. Deshmukh, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties. 2. This appeal from order is filed by appellants under Order XLIII Rule 1(u) of the Code of Civil Procedure ('CPC'). Following is the substantial question of law, framed by this Court by earlier order passed on 16.9.2008. ' Whether seeking a declaration that, an ownership certificate issued in favour of the defendant is not binding on the plaintiff is not founded on the admission of tenancy of the defendant ?'3. Appellant No. 1 in this appeal was defendant No. 1 in Special Civil Suit No. 11 of 1974 filed by respondent No. 1 in this appeal. Parties, hereinafter, are referred to their original status in the suit, for the sake of convenience. 4. Plaintiff has filed the suit for declaration that the certificate issued by the Tenancy Court on 18.6.1963 regarding land S. No. 7 in favour of Kashim is null and void and also sought possession of the suit property. The trial court after hearing the parties and considering the ...
Jamunabai Bhalchandra Bhoir and ors. Vs. Moreshwar Mukund Bhoir
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)BomCR278
Bhatia J.H., J.1. The appeal is filed by the original defendant challenging the judgment and order passed by the learned Joint District Judge, Thane in Civil Appeal No. 10 of 2004, whereby the said appeal was allowed, setting aside the dismissal of the regular Civil Suit No. 220 of 2000 by the learned Vth Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Thane.2. To state in brief, the plaintiff/respondent Moreshwar and the deceased defendant/appellant Jamunabai were the real brother and sister. Jamunabai died pending the second appeal and her legal representatives were brought on record. One Mukund Bhoir was their father and Gangabai was their mother. Suit property bearing Survey No. 658, Hissa No. 3 corresponding to new Survey No. 251, Hissa No. 3 situated at Village : Bhayander, Tahika & District : Thane was admittedly owned by Mukund, father of the parties. According to the plaintiff, their parents were married in or about 1928 and the defendant Jamunabai was born sometimes in the year 1932. Pla...
Shivkumar Maruti Umardand Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ2549
N.V. Dabholkar, J.1. By this appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. the appellant/original accused challenges the judgment and order passed by the Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Osmanabad on 30.11.2006 in Sessions Case No. 13 of 2006. The appellant was accused No. 1 in the case.In fact, the appellant, his mother and his younger brother were charged for offence punishable under Section 498A r.w. Section 34 of I.P.C. The appellant alone was charged for offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 are totally acquitted and appellant is held guilty on both the counts. So far as offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C. is concerned, he is sentenced to suffer life imprisonment, fine Rs. 5000/-, I.D.R.I. for two years. For offence punishable under Section 498A of I.P.C., he is sentenced to suffer R.I. for two years, fine Rs. 2000/-, I.D.R.I. for six months.2. The incident in question is stated to have taken place on 4th January, 2005 at about 8.30 p.m. at the ...
Anand Nursing Home Vs. Mahadev Gaikwad
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-2008
Reported in: [2008(119)FLR907]; (2009)IILLJ580Bom
ORDERS.A. Bobde, J.1. This is a Notice of Motion taken out by the respondent-workman under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act', for full wages last drawn by him or for a direction to deposit the back wages.2. The respondent was directed to be reinstated by the Labour Court along with back wages. The petitioner filed this Writ Petition which is pending since October 7, 2005. On February 22, 2006 the employer seems to have made a statement before this Court that it would reinstate the respondent. Apparently, therefore, this Court granted stay of back wages. There is some dispute whether thereafter employer allowed the respondent to join work or not. However, it is clear that the respondent workman did not take any steps to enforce the order of reinstatement. Since the respondent was not on duty and continued to remain absent, the petitioner issued a charge-sheet dated February 16, 2007. After holding an inquiry, the petitioner has dismis...
Alok Parshuram Jalan, Managing Director of Laqshya Media Private Limit ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-2008
Reported in: 2009(3)BomCR477; (2008)110BOMLR3323
P.B. Majmudar, J.1. Rule. Learned Counsel appearing for respective respondents waive service of Rule.2. Since common point is involved in all these petitions, with the consent of the learned Counsel, all these petitions were heard together and are disposed of now by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience, the facts are taken from Writ Petition No. 1853 of 2008, as the main dispute is common in all these petitions.3. The main challenge in these writ petitions is to the award of contract for display of advertisements by affixing kiosks on pole and non illuminated display board on bracket of street lighting pole belonging to the Brihan Mumbai Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking (BEST) and Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay for a period of 36 months, on the ground that at the time of processing various tenders, respondent No. 1 has deviated from the conditions incorporated in the tender conditions illegally, arbitrarily and in a surreptitious manner the tender of resp...
Vijaya Vilas Pemgirikar Vs. the State of Maharashtra Through Its Princ ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-2008
Reported in: (2008)110BOMLR3387
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. Heard forthwith.2. The petitioner was admitted to the three year degree course in law from SPS Law College, Sangamner, affiliated to the University of Pune -respondent No. 2. The petitioner was admitted during the academic year 2002-03. The petitioner has been declared to have been passed in the First Class.3. In terms of the Rules for Standard for Passing, Benefit, etc. of the University of Pune, Faculty of Law, the following rules are relevant:1. Standard of Passing:To pass any examination, a candidate must obtain 35% of the full marks in each paper b. 50% of the total marks in the examination. Entitlement to appear at the end of the academic year:A candidate who has completed his term for Semester I, III or V of the three-year LL.B. Course, and has paid examination fees for such Semester-Examination, but has remained absent for any or all papers or has failed in any or all papers at such Semester Examination, shall be entitled to appear for any or all of suc...
Anjali Jayant Khati Vs. Bal Mandir Sanstha, a Society Registered Under ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)BomCR206; (2008)110BOMLR3413
C.L. Pangarkar, J.1. All these three Writ Petitions can be disposed of by common judgment since all petitioners seek to challenge their placement in the seniority inter se. 2. Facts giving rise to these petitions are as follows: All petitioners came to be appointed as Assistant Teachers in respondent No. 1's School. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 72 of 1994 came to be appointed on 17.07.1987. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 67 of 1994 came to be appointed w. e. f. 06.07.1987 while the petitioner in Writ petition No. 171 of 1994 came to be appointed on 25.06.1987. After they were so appointed the School was converted into grant-in-aid School. There was, therefore, necessity to fix the seniority of the petitioners. It is contended that the petitioners were required to file Writ Petition No. 2737 of 1992 and other petitions when they were allegedly transferred from one branch of the school to the other branch. This Court in Writ Petition No. 2737 and 2735 of 1992 directed that a ...
John Wyeth and Brother Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-2008
Reported in: (2008)220CTR(Bom)416; [2009]312ITR80(Bom)
S.J. Kathawalla, J.1. The Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench 'B' has, at the instance of the applicant (assessee) by its statement of case dated 18th April, 1991 referred to this Court the following questions arising out of the order of the Tribunal dated 26th October, 1989 pertaining to Assessment Years 1977-78 and 1978-79. 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the matter requires consideration as to whether the laboratory expenses claimed include any of the expenditure mentioned in Clauses (a) to (d) of Explanation (iv) to Section 44C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 even though in its general meaning 'Head Office Expenditure' might not as such include the laboratory expenses?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal ought to have held that laboratory expenses of Rs. 12,72,330/-were allowable as a deduction in the computation of the assessees income? 2. The facts relevant for the purpose of decid...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »