Mumbai Court July 2009 Judgments

Smt. Dipika Anil Jani Vs. Smt. Rekha Bhartia

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Mrs. S.P. Lale, Honble Member 1) This appeal filed by the Appellant/Org.Complainant is directed against the dismissal order dated 24/04/2007 in consumer complaint No.215/2005 passed by the District Consumer Forum, South Mumbai (Forum below in short). The Forum below dismissed the complaint on the ground of maintainability of the present complaint. Being aggrieved by the said order the Complainant herself has filed the present appeal. 2) The fact giving rise to this appeal are as under - The Complainant booked the flat with Opposite Party on 03/04/2000 bearing No.504 admeasuring 608 sq.ft. built up area on 5th floor in the proposed building Aum Kiran Apartment, Ram Nagar, Shimpoli, Borivali (West). The cost of said flat was fixed Rs.9,94,860. The Complainant paid Rs.1,00,000/- as earnest money on 30/04/2000. Accordingly Opposite Party executed an Agreement for sale in favour Complainant on 18/05/2000. The possession of the flat was to be handed over to the Complainant in the month...

Mr. Jitendra Balkrishana Madan Vs. M/S. Icici Lombard General Insuranc ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Honble Presiding Judicial Member 1) This appeal arises out of order/award dated 15/11/2008 passed in Consumer complaint No.116/2008 Mr.Jitendra Balkrishana Madan V/s M/s.ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co.Ltd. by Thane District Consumer Forum (Forum below in short). Respondent /Org. Complainants (hereinafter referred as Complainant). 2) The Complainant made an insurance claim which is repudiated by the Insurance Company. The Forum below stood rejected the complaint and feeling aggrieved thereby this appeal is preferred by Appellant/Org.Complainant. 3) Admitted facts are that the Complainant Jitendra B.Madans parents, wife and brother Kuldeep Madan died in a road accident on 22/10/2006. Complainants brother Kuldeep was primary credit card holder and as a result of which the card issuing company i.e. ICICI Bank offered personal accident insurance cover was offered to him of Rs.1,00,000/- for death in any accident other than Air accident. The Complainant made cla...

Satish Kumar Agarwal Vs. the State

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(111)BomLR2928

B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. This appeal filed under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. arises from the order of conviction and sentence dated 4/2/1989 in Sessions Case No. 67 of 1987 passed by the learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge at Daman. By the said order the appellant came to be convicted under Section 302 of IPC and he has been sentenced to undergo RI for life. It is said that Alcoholism coupled with gambling has the power to free a man from the shackles of self control and unleash bloody paths, but this case goes much beyond that general belief and puts up a gory story of triple murders by a loving and caring husband and father who was liberated from self control by alcoholism and gambling. He killed his dearest wife and two daughters while they were fast asleep and attempted to end his life as well but destiny had ordained a different course, namely, he survived and faced a trial and perhaps die as a prisoner as the very same vices saved him from going to the gallows. 2. The appellant was...

Sanjay Dagadappa Kapse Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(6)BomCR203

1. Heard.2. The applicant/petitioner has filed this application for restoration of the writ petition, which was dismissed in default. We see no reason why the petitioner filed this application if the petition has been dismissed in default and it came to the notice of the Advocate on the very same day. The Advocate could have sought restoration of the matter on an oral application. We are constrained to make this observation since too often applications or motions in writing for restoration come up for orders before the Court, though the dismissal came to the knowledge of the Advocates on the same day.3. In (P.D. Shamdasani v. The Central Bank of India Ltd.) : 1938(40) Bom.L.R. 238; a Special Bench of this Court observed in that case, the negligence was exceedingly slight and the discretion not to restore the matter was exercised on wrong basis. In regard to matters which are dismissed for non appearance and an application is made by the party for restoration, it was observed as follows...

Shri Raimalbua Sansthan - Trust, a Registered Public Trust by Its Mana ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2010(1)BomCR289

C.L. Pangarkar, J.1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally with consent of the parties.2. By this writ petition, the petitioner - Trust challenges the decision rendered by the District Judge - I in Regular Civil Appeal No. 78 of 2006, whereby he set aside the decree for possession in favour of the petitioner/plaintiff.3. The facts are as follows The petitioner/plaintiff is a trust and is the owner of the suit property. It is alleged that one Namdeo Wankhade was inducted as a licensee in the suit premises and in lieu of the same he used to render the services to the trust. It is also alleged that he used to clean the premises and offer 'Puja and Archana'. It was agreed that the licensee should not encroach upon any portion of the property belonging to the petitioner. It was further agreed that upon death of the original licensee, the licence was liable to be terminated. After death of Namdeo his son Ramkrushna became a licensee. Ramkrushna was also performing the same job and after ...

M/S. Bhagwant Enterprises, Thru. Proprietor Mr. Balasaheb B. Lonkar, P ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Oral Order: Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Honble Presiding Judicial Member 1. Heard Mr. A.V. Patwardhan-Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Rahul Gandhi-Advocate for the respondents. 2. Both these appeals and their connected misc. applications for condonation of delay are heard together since they involve identical questions of facts and law. There is delay of about 60 days in filing both the appeals and the reasons mentioned are three fold viz, personal illness, marriage of the son and Terrorist attack on Mumbai, as a result of which offices were paralysed. Delay being not intentional, we find the reason given afford sufficient ground to condone the same and, hence, we allow the misc. applications for condonation of delay being nos.130/2009 in Appeal no.84/2009 and 133/2009 in Appeal no.85/2009. 3. We heard forthwith with consent of parties the appeals on merit. Both these impugned awards are passed ex-parte. Considering the nature of the issues involved, it is desirable to settle the lis aft...

Tata Motors Ltd., Pimpri, Pune and Another Vs. Mr. Narayan Dattu Mandv ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Smt. S.P. Lale, Honble Member 1. This appeal filed by the original O.Ps is directed against the order dated 13/01/2009 passed by District Consumer Forum, Solapur in consumer complaint no.38/2008, whereby Forum below directed O.Ps to replace the engine of the said vehicle and remove all the defects of the car. Forum below further directed O.Ps to pay compensation of Rs.5000/- per month from 6/2/2008 till the car is repaired and pay Rs.5000/- as cost to the complainant. Being aggrieved by the said order, O.Ps have filed the present appeal. Facts giving rise to this appeal are as under:- 2. Complainant purchased Tata vehicle bearing no.MH-13-R-2973 on 30/7/2007 from O.P.no.1. It is alleged by the complainant that after purchase of the said vehicle within 5 months the engine block of the said vehicle broke into two and head of the engine got separated from the engine and fell down. Vehicle was towed to the workshop of O.P.no.1 for repairs, where the entire block of the engine was chang...

National Insurance Co. Ltd., Mumbai Vs. Shri Subhash B. Jatania, Mumba ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Honble Presiding Judicial Member This appeal arises out of impugned order/award dated 22/05/2008 passed in consumer complaint No.283/2003 Shri Subhash B. Jatania V/s. National Insurance Co. Ltd. by South Mumbai District Consumer Forum (Forum below in short). Consumer complaint was made against appellant/org.O.P.-Insurance Company against repudiation of medi-claim. Consumer complaint was allowed and hence, O.P./Insurance Company preferred this appeal. Medi-claim policy covering hospitalization charges was taken by the respondent/org. complainant for period 22/06/2001 to 21/06/2002 and which eventually was renewed to 21/06/2003. Same policy was issued after considering proposal form filled by the complainant on 20/06/2001. Complainant was hospitalized for period 06/11/2001 to 06/12/2001 for the known case of Myasthenia Gravis. He preferred a insurance claim for Rs.1,11,579/- and which was granted as per the impugned award. Repudiation of the claim by the Insurance...

icici Bank Ltd. Reg. Office – Landmark, Vadodara and Another Vs. ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Oral Order:- Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Honble Presiding Judicial Member This appeal arises out of order/award dated 17/08/2007 passed in consumer complaint No.483/2006 Shri Ramchandra D. Kamble V/s. ICICI Bank Ltd. by District Consumer Forum Kolhapur (Forum below in short). Respondent/org. complainant had taken a loan of Rs.34,000/- to purchase a motorcycle from appellant/org. O.P.No.1-Bank. It was to be repaid in 36 monthly equated installments of Rs.1,214/- each. Since loan remained unpaid and since the default was committed by the complainant, vehicle was taken into its possession by the appellant/Bank on 25/12/2006. Thereafter, putting grievance for taking such possession of the vehicle in an highhanded manner and disputing the correctness of the loan account, the complainant had filed consumer complaint in question. Same is decreed in his favour and feeling aggrieved thereby, O.Ps.-Bank preferred this appeal. We heard Mr.A.S. Vidyarthi, Advocate for the appellants/Bank and Mr.Shrik...

Mohan Ajabrao Telkhade Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Department of Rur ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(4)BomCR517; 2009(111)BomLR2780

C.L. Pangarkar, J.1. By this Writ Petition the petitioner challenges the order passed by the Hon'ble Minister whereby he set aside the order of Commissioner under Village Panchayat Act dissolving the Gram Panchayat, and directing byelections for vacant posts to be held.2. Facts giving rise to the petition are as follows:There is a Gram Panchayat at village Rama which consists of 9 members. Petitioner submits that out of the nine, four members were disqualified on the ground that they had deliberately remained absent during the meeting of the Gram Panchayat. One of the members of the Gram Panchayat was disqualified under Section 14 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act and as such total five members out of nine were disqualified from holding the office of the Member of the Gram Panchayat. Accordingly the Chief Executive Officer of the Zilla Parishad had submitted a report to the Additional Collector on 20.12.2006 informing him that out of nine, five posts have fallen vacant. Proposal was ...