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.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Bindiya Udaykumar Adwani and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-19-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)BomCR380
Naik Vasanti A., J.1. By this first appeal, the appellant challenges the judgment and Award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Akola, on 22/4/1996, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 105/ 1994, so far as it holds the appellant-United India Insurance Company jointly and severally liable to pay the amount of Rs. 77,465/ - to the respondent No. 1-claimant. According to the appellant-Insurance Company, it was not liable to pay compensation to the claimant in view of the provisions of Section 149(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.2. Few facts giving rise to the first appeal are stated thus-On 30/12/1993, respondent/claimant Bindiya was standing near the house of one Rajandas in Sindhi Camp, along with her son. At that time, a car bearing No. MH-30/8573 came from her left side in high speed and gave a dash to her while taking a turn at the square. As a result of the accident, Bindiya received fracture to her left femur bone. The car also dashed against one Savitrabai who was st...
Shivaji S/O Krishnaji Bhalerao Vs. the State of Maharashtra Through th ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)ALLMR666; 2009(1)BomCR142; (2008)110BOMLR3096
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. Heard forthwith.2. The petitioner has described himself as a voter of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Jawla Bazar and as a citizen of India. Respondent Nos. 4 to 10 are the members of the Board of Administrators appointed under Section 15A(1)(b) read with Section 15A(1A). Respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6 were earlier members of the Managing Committee, respondent No. 4 being the Chairman, respondent No. 6 being the Vice-Chairman and respondent No. 5 being the member of the Committee. According to the admitted facts, the term of the elected committee was up to 31-12-2006. According to the petitioner, respondent - State had given three months extension to the members of the Managing Committee of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC). This period of three months was to expire on 31-03-2007. By order dated 23-03-2007 under Section 14(3) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963, (hereafter referred to as...
Rameshwar S/O Vishnu Suradkar Vs. the Divisional Secretary, Maharashtr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)ALLMR799; 2009(1)BomCR76; 2009(2)MhLj363
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule, heard forthwith.2. The petitioner had appeared for the S.S.C. Examination in the year 1997 and secured 54.66% marks. The petitioner was thereafter admitted for 11th and 12th Standard in Mahatma Phule Junior College, Pishor, Tq. Kannad District Aurangabad and he appeared for H.S.C. Examination in the year 2000 and secured 382 out of 600 marks (63.67%). The petitioner decided to take admission for D.Ed. course but due to less percentage, he could not get admission. In the year 2002, the petitioner inquired about procedure for admission to enrol as a private candidate under Regulation 89 and 92 of the Maharashtra Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Boards Regulation 1977 (hereafter referred to as 'The Regulations'). He paid the prescribed fees and enrolled himself as a external candidate. Form No. 17, filed by the petitioner came to be accepted. The hall ticket was issued and the petitioner passed that examination the second time and secured 71.33% marks.Afte...
Yuvraj Nathuji Rodye (Dy. Executive Engineer, Maharashtra State Electr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)BomCR850; 2008(6)MhLj384
Anoop V. Mohta, J.1. The petitioner who was in service of respondent No. 5 has filed the present petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and prayed basically for appropriate order or directions to pay Rs. 3,33,518/- being the penal interest at the rate of 16% per annum on the amount of delayed payment of arrears of pay which were due and payable in the year 1989 but were paid in September-1994. There is no dispute that the Executive Engineer of the concerned respondent by letter dated 18.08.1994 informed the petitioner that they have drawn the pay fixation arrears with effect from 01.08.1975 to 30.11.1993 for 20 years and thereby directed the Accounts Officer of the respondents at Nagpur to make arrangements for the said payment. The petitioner accordingly received the payment. However, through proper channel made representation to grant compensation towards interest including for mental torture for 20 years. There is no dispute about the delayed payment as it w...
Suyog S/O Vilasrao JaIn Vs. the State of Maharashtra Through Its Secre ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)ALLMR660; 2009(1)BomCR322
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule, heard forthwith. 2. The petitioner is studying in second year of four year degree course of Pharmacy. The petitioner had passed Diploma of Pharmacy having secured 603 marks out of 1000. The petitioner had earlier secured 60% marks in S.S.C. and 52.83% marks in H.S.C. All these facts have been disclosed in the application form for admission to second year of four year degree course in Pharmacy. The petitioners name at the time of admission was shown at Serial No. 37 in the merit list and was given admission after due scrutiny for academic year 2007-2008. The petitioner paid tuition fees of Rs. 25,000/- on 17-08-2007. The petitioner appeared for the second year B. Pharmacy examination held in November 2007. The results were declared on 12-02-2008.According to the petitioner, the Principal of respondent No. 3 College called on the petitioner on 25-02-2008 and was asked to give him in writing that his admission would be subject to approval by the North Maharashtra ...
Eknathbuwa Gyanoba Bharati and ors. Vs. Sheshabai Laxman Buwa (Abated) ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)ALLMR762; 2008(6)BomCR263
Borkar P.R., J.1. This is an appeal preferred by original defendant No. 6 being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Ahmedpur in Regular Civil Suit No. 217 of 1974 dated 16th April, 1979, whereby share of each of original plaintiff Nos. 2 to 5 was declared to be 8/81th in the suit field Survey No. 107 admeasuring 26 acres and 27 gunthas and Survey No. 112/B admeasuring 12 acres 26 gunthas both situated at Kingaon, Tal. Ahmedpur and for delivery of possession to plaintiff Nos. 2 to 5 to the extent of their shares by the present appellant in the property. Said judgment and decree was confirmed in Regular Civil Appeal No. 57 of 1979 by the Additional District Judge, Latur on 16th October, 1987 without any modification.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal regarding which there is no more dispute can be stated as below:One Vithalbuwa who died on 29.4.1963 was the original owner of the suit property. He was survived by his widow Yamunabai (w...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Balkrishna Bhaduji Kakhe and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)BomCR370
ORDERDongaonkar S.R., J.1. The appellant has taken exception to the judgment and award passed by Member, M.A.C.T., Akola, in M.A.C.P. No. 107/91, dated 30th October, 1993, in a claim petition filed by respondent Nos. 1 to 6 against respondent Nos. 7 to 11 & appellant for claiming compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- for the death of the son of respondent Nos. 1 and 2, namely Raju, who died in an accident in a collision between two trucks, one bearing Number MHG-7655 driven by respondent No. 8 Gurubachansingh Mangalsingh and owned by respondent No. 7 Smt. Parvindar Kaur Tuli and insured with the present appellant i.e. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., and the another truck bearing No. MTG-8466, owned by respondent No. 9 Sayyed Jafar, driven by respondent No. 10 Mohd. Ismail Sheikh and insured with respondent No. 11 New India Assurance Co. Ltd.2. The assertions of respondent Nos. 1 to 6 in the petition were that respondent Nos. 1 & 2 are the parents of deceased Raju whereas respondent Nos. 3, 4, 5 ...
National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Asha Bhalchandra Joshi, Now Aas ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-17-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)BomCR434
Dongaonkar S.R., J.1. By this appeal, the appellant/ National Insurance Company is taking exception to the judgment and Award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur in Claim Petition No. 473/1991 filed by respondent/original claimant, dated 26th August, 2002, for claiming compensation against original respondent No. 2-Driver of the offending truck, the respondent No. 3-owner of the offending vehicle-Truck bearing No. NLM 8876 allegedly insured with the appellant, in respect of the injuries and permanent disablement caused to her in an accident dated 11.4.1991 when she was returning to home by her Luna Moped at about 5.20 p.m. on Hingna-Wadi road when she was hit by the offending truck and suffered multiple injuries to her both legs.2. Facts leading to her claim were that in the year 1991 she was serving with one Sandeep Polymers, M.I.D.C. Nagpur as Office Assistant. On the fateful day, she was returning home on her Luna Moped. When she was about to take turn on Hingna-Wad...
The State of Maharashtra Vs. Bhausaheb Ekanth Pawar,
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2008
Reported in: (2008)110BOMLR3159
S.S. Shinde, J.1. The present appeal is filed by the appellant-State of Maharashtra, challenging the judgment and order dated 11.6.1990, rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, Beed in Sessions Case No. 53 of 1989, thereby acquitting the respondents of the charges for offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 r.w. 34 of I.P.C.2. Brief facts of the case are as under:Deceased Janabai was real sister of complainant P.W.7 Machindra Haral and P.W.5 Subhash Kisan Haral and the daughter of Kisan Ram (P.W.2) of village Bramhagaon, Tq. Ashti. Deceased Janabai was married to accused No. 1 Bhausaheb in the year 1985. The accused is resident of same village. The distance between the house of the complainant and the house of the accused Bhausaheb is about 25 ft. The complainant Machindra at the relevant time was serving in Army. After marriage, deceased Janabai was residing in the house of her husband i.e. accused Bhausaheb. It is further case of the prosecution that accused Bhausaheb used to bea...
Novodaya Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Through Its Chairman, Shri ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)BomCR228; (2008)110BOMLR3120
S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner Co-operative Housing Society is, inter alia, praying for the following reliefs:(a) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus or other writ directing the respondent No. 2 to act and transfer the title of plot 'A' admeasuring 10561 sq. metres as per the approved plan in favour of the petitioners.(b) Issue writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the respondent No. 4 to act upon the complaint of the petitioner and take action as per law against the illegal encroachment made by the petitioner and remove the encroachment of illegal construction done by the respondent No. 2 on internal road and on plot 'A'.2. The first respondent to this petition is the State of Goa. In fact, respondents No. 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 are not the contesting respondents. Respondent No. 2 is the Housing Board which is a Statutory Body, registered un...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »