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.
Waheed Akhtar Ansari Vs. the President, Khairul Islam Higher Education ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)BomCR84
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. Rule, made returnable forthwith. Counsel appearing for the Respondents waive service. By consent of the learned Counsel, taken up for hearing and final disposal.2. On 22nd August, 2002 the Petitioner was appointed as a Shikshan Sevak in a junior college conducted by the First and Second Respondents for a term of three years. A complaint was addressed on 16th January, 2003 to the management by a lady lecturer complaining of sexual harassment by the Petitioner. An explanation was called for by the management from the Petitioner on 18th January, 2003 and his services were terminated on 31st January, 2003. According to the Petitioner, between the receipt of the complaint and the letter of termination certain events transpired. The allegation of the Petitioner is that on 22nd January, 2003 he was called to the police station at Nagpada; he was assaulted there and he was compelled to sign an in culpatory statement. Thereafter, the Petitioner alleges that on 25th Januar...
Ranba S/O. Sattaji (Deceased) (Ahilyabai W/O. Prabhakar Kandharkar (Da ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)ALLMR767; 2009(1)BomCR147; 2009(2)MhLj279
P.R. Borkar, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the person who is dissatisfied with the order of apportionment of compensation passed under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nanded in L.A.R. No. 45 of 1987 decided on 31.07.1989.2. In short it is case of appellant Ranba that land Survey No. 51 / 1 situated at village Vasarni, Tal. & Dist. Nanded to the extent of 2 Hectares 54 R was acquired by the Government and notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published. The final award was passed on 19.03.1987. Notices were issued under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act to concerned land owners and original appellant Ranba and respondent No. 2 Pandu both filed their claim before the Land Acquisition Officer.3. It is further case of original appellant Ranba that the land Survey No. 51/1 was originally owned by Vamanrao Ghansham Naik. Ranba was declared as the protected tenant and purchaser under the provisions of the...
Harshawadan Bandivadekar Vs. Taramati Harishchandra Ghanekar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)BomCR170
Radhakrishnan S., J.1. By this appeal, the appellant is challenging the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 20th April, 2007 in the above notice of motion. The respondents (petitioners in the Contempt petition) formed a Co-operative Housing Society named 'Swarupanand Coop. Housing Society in respect of a certain property, for which they had appointed the Developers M/s. S.B. Brothers Developers, a partnership firm, of which appellant is a partner.2. The respondents had filed a writ petition in this Court, which had been disposed of by an Order dated 18/6/2002, perusal of which shows that;On 3/5/2002, the appellant being a partner of the Developer firm had filed an undertaking that the construction of the building for accommodating the respondent-Slum-dwellers would be completed and that they would be given possession of their respective premises within the period of 24 months from the date of the order.An affidavit to that effect was filed by the appellant in this Cour...
Vijay Khanna and anr. Vs. Official Assignee of Bombay and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)BomCR397
Bobde S.A., J.1. Heard.2. By this Notice of Motion, the applicants against whom the Insolvency was annulled have applied for reduction in the rate of interest determined by the Official Assignee while holding that the claimant has proved her claim. The main objection of the learned Counsel is that the Official Assignee has determined interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of dishonour of cheques till payment.3. The applicants were declared insolvents. Thereafter, the insolvency was annulled. At the time of annulment, an Indemnity Bond dated 31.10.2006 was submitted to this Court that the Official Assignee may indemnify against any claim which may be/received or included in the Schedule or any other creditor of the Official Assignee. One Vandana Section Tejwani, i.e. respondent No. 2 accordingly made a claim in the petition. She submitted that the cheque dated 30.11.2000 was dishonoured on 19.4.2001 and she is entitled to sum of Rs. 50,000/- along with interest at the rate ...
Navnath Kanha Naik and ors. Vs. United Breweries Ltd. and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2008
Reported in: [2008(119)FLR890]; (2009)IILLJ558Bom
Nishita Mhatre, J.1. Rule. By consent of the parties, Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally.2. The order challenged in this petition has been passed by the Industrial Court in Complaint (ULP) No. 90/2008 filed by the petitioners. By this order dated May 8, 2008, the Industrial Court has rejected the application for interim relief filed in the complaint. The petitioners had sought a direction against the respondents from removal of the plant and machinery of the factory at Nerul pending the review application filed by them under Section 25O(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').3. The facts involved in the present Petition are as follows:In 2001, the respondent Company took over the management of Associated Breweries and Distilleries Limited in 2001 which had a manufacturing plant at Nerul. The aforesaid Company was then merged with the respondent Company in 2005. It appears that after the merger, the Chairman of the respondent Co...
Abhijit Bhikaseth Auti Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ889
ORDERAbhay S. Oka, J.1. The submissions of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties were heard on the last date. Following questions arise for consideration in this petition:(i) Whether an order passed on an application made under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act') is appealable under Section 23 of the said Act?(ii) Whether an appeal will lie under Section 29 of the said Act against every order passed by the learned Magistrate in proceedings initiated on the basis of an application made under Section 12 of the said Act?(iii) What is the scope of an appeal under Section 29 of the said Act?Apart from aforesaid questions, there are factual questions arising in this petition.2. The 2nd respondent is the wife of the petitioner. The marriage between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent was solemnised on 22nd April 2004. According to the case made out by the 2nd respondent, after marriage, she stayed along w...
Britannia Industries Ltd. Vs. Maharashtra General Kamgar Union and anr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2008
Reported in: 2008(1)ALLMR126; (2009)IILLJ555Bom
ORDERS.A. Bobde, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This Notice of Motion is taken put by the respondent No. 1 - Union asking for payment of full last drawn wages under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Union is a respondent to a petition filed by the employer against the Order of Industrial Court refusing permission for closing down a Unit of the employer - Britannia Industries Ltd.3. Rule was issued on the petition in February 2006. It was made returnable in 2nd week of June, 2000. Pending the petition, parties agreed to Minutes of Order dated February 13, 2006. An aspect of the Minutes of order which is significant to this Notice of Motion is that the workmen were to be paid 50% of the last drawn wages from the period beginning the month following the month for which he was paid.4. The writ petition was taken up for final hearing but a question arising therefrom has been referred for decision to a Larger Bench. In view of the further anticipated delay in the...
Ashta Lokmanya Nagri Sahakari Patsanstha Moryadit Vs. Shankar Bapu Nam ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)BomCR287
Daga V.C., J.1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard by consent of parties.2. This petition, filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the judgment and order dated 19th March, 2008 passed in Revision Application No. 383/2007 by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur.Factual Matrix:3. The petitioner herein is a Special Recovery Officer of Ashta Lokmanya Nagri Sahakari Pathsanstha Maryadit, Ashta, Sangli a credit society ('Credit Society' for short) registered under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 ('MCS Act' for short). On 7th February, 1997, the respondent No. 1 approached to the Sangli Branch of the Credit Society for obtaining loan of Rs. 1 lakh for construction of the house.4. The Credit Society, on 23rd March, 1997, sanctioned loan in favour of the respondent No. 1. The respondent No. 1 has mortgaged his agricultural land being Gat No. 22-B admeasuring 4 hectors situated at village Salagare, tahika-Miraj, district-San...
Smt. Nirmalabai D. Kale and ors. Vs. Shri Madan S/O Shri Balaji Ratan, ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-15-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)ALLMR747; 2009(1)BomCR309
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. The matter has been heard on 11.09.2008 and thereafter on 12.9.2008. It was required to be kept today for judgment as Shri Ghare, learned Counsel for the non-applicant wanted to cite some authority from Corporate Law Advisor reported at 1994 (13) Corporate Law Advisor 405. Xerox copy is made available and after going through it, the learned Counsel did not press the ruling into service.2. The challenge in this Revision Application is to the order dated 11.09.2003 passed below Exh. 11 by 6th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nagpur, in Regular Civil Suit No. 1051 of 2003 rejecting the application filed by present revision applicants under Order 7, Rule 11 (a), (b) and (c) of Civil Procedure Code. The application also contain a prayer in alternative to issue direction to present non-applicant to correct valuation of his suit and to pay the deficit Court fees. The revision came to be admitted and interim stay to further proceedings in Regular Civil Suit No. 1051...
Antony Eugene Pinto and ors. Vs. Eugene Cajetan Pinto and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-15-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)BomCR828
Dalvi Roshan, J.1. This Suit has been directed to be tried along with and immediately after the Testamentary Suit No. 5 of 2004 is disposed of granting or refusing letters of Administration with the last Will and Testament of Prof. Cosmas Damian T. Pinto (the deceased), dated 12th February, 1963 annexed thereto.2. That is because the parties in the Testamentary Suit are also the parties in this Suit and the evidence with regard to the estate of the deceased would be overlapping.3. The original plaintiffs, defendants 1 and 2 and the husband of defendant No. 3 are the 8 children of the said deceased. The plaintiff Nos. 1, 2 and 3 have expired after the filing of the Suit. Their heirs have been brought on record as party plaintiffs.4. The defendant Nos. 1 and 2 have sought to propound the Will of the deceased dated 12th February, 1963. Hence they are required to probate the Will. Accordingly they have filed Testamentary Petition No. 5 of 2004. The original plaintiff No. 3 has filed Caveat...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »