Mumbai Court September 2009 Judgments

Uttam S/O Pandurang Sabde, Vs. Osmanabad Janta Sahakari Bank Ltd. Thro ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2010(1)MhLj641

S.S. Shinde, J.1. This Writ Petition is filed challenging the Judgment and Order dated 16/3/2002 passed by the Member, Cooperative Appellate Court, Aurangabad in Appeal No. 61 of 2001.2. The background facts of the case as disclosed in the petition are as under.The Respondent No. 1 herein advanced loan of Rs. 8,00,000/in favour of petitioners on monthly instalment of Rs. 10,500/with interest @ 11 % per annum. The petitioners herein executed hypothecation deed in favour of Bank. The rate of interest was not mentioned in the said deed. The petitioners herein requested the Respondent No. 1 Bank to give him balance statement and statement of accounts, but, the Bank initially avoided to give him balance statement. The respondent No. 1 issued notice through respondent No. 2 to start proceeding under Section 101 of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 ( for short ' the Act ' ). The petitioners in reply to said notice, contended that he paid huge amount in the month of March, 1996 and s...

Gawar Construction Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(111)BomLR4038; 2009(170)LC5(Bombay); 2009(243)ELT484(Bom)

D.G. Karnik, J.1. Rule, by consent heard forthwith. The respondent No. 3 has not put any appearance though served.2. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a mandamus or a direction or order directing the Union of India and the customs authorities to forthwith release the Hot Mix Paver Machine seized by them from the premises of the petitioner under the seizure memo dated 14th November 2008.3. The respondent No. 3 imported Hot Mix Paver Machine bearing model No. M/CS1800, SI No. 06681674 (for short 'the machine') through WIRTGEN India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore in the month of October 2005 without payment of customs duty as an actual user in view of an exemption allowed to actual users. The machine was insured by it with ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. for a sum of Rs. 9,29,89,400/. The machine met with an accident in or about January 2007. The respondent No. 3 reported the accident to the insurance company. After the inspection, the insurance company was of the view that the machine cou...

Shri Pandit Tukaram Dharrao (Since Deceased) by His L.R.S and ors. Vs. ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(111)BomLR4356; 2009(6)MhLj854

Nishita Mhatre, J.1. The present appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court in Regular Civil Suit No. 78 of 1972 and the judgment and order in the appeal i.e. Civil Appeal No. 233 of 1981.2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are as follows:One Chandrabhagabai had inherited the disputed property being an open space and a house standing at C.T.S. No. 1163 at Kasbe Niphad, Tal. Niphad, Dist. Nasik. Her grandson Ananda inherited her property after her death. In the year 1929, it appears that Anandas father Bhikaji i.e. the son-in-law of Chandrabhagabai had mortgaged the property with a Co-operative Society. Ananda then redeemed the property from the Co-operative Society in 1933. The appellants claim that Ananda executed a registered sale deed in favour of one Pandit Tukaram Dharrao and one Shri Punja and sold the suit property to them.3. The plaintiff Shankar filed Regular Civil Suit No. 78 of 1972 against the defendants for an injunction and ...

The Thane Janta Sahakari Bank Vs. Election Commission of India and ors ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(6)BomCR13; 2009(111)BomLR4401; 2010(1)MhLj152

S.B. Mhase, J.1. Rule, made returnable forthwith by consent of the parties and heard.2. These petitioners have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the orders passed by the District Collectors and District Election Officers appointed for the ensuing Maharashtra State Assembly Election whereby these officers have requisitioned the staff of the Petitioner institutions. These petitions relate to the Thane District, Mumbai District and Mumbai Suburban District areas only and Orders issued by the District Collector and District Elections officers for those areas only.3. The Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 8052 of 2009 is a public sector undertaking which is established under the Life Insurance Corporation Act XXXI of 1956 having its central office at Yagakeshema, Jeevan Bima Marg, Mumbai 400 021 and branches all over India. Writ Petition Nos. 8039 of 2009, 8089 of 2009 and 8111 of 2009 are filed by the cooperative banks established under the Mahar...

Narayan S/O Gujabrao Bhoyar Vs. Yeotmal Zilla Parishad Karmachari and ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(6)BomCR277; 2009(111)BomLR4211; 2009(6)MhLj500

Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. In the year 2006, Narayan Gujabrao Bhoyar [hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner'] was elected as a Member of the Managing Committee of Yavatmal Zilla Parishad Karmachari Sahakari Sanstha [hereinafter referred as 'the Society'] and also as a Secretary of the Respondent No. 1 Society.2. The President of the Society resigned from his post allegedly on the ground that there were allegations of fraud while discharging his duties as President of the Respondent Society.3. According to the petitioner, the respondent No. 2 called an illegal meeting and in that meeting, a decision is stated to have been taken that resignation of the President was rejected. A meeting of the Directors of the Society was also held and while passing Resolution No. 5, it was resolved that the petitioner had not paid the amount of advance within thirty days and, thus, incurred the disqualification as per the provisions of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 [hereinafter referr...

The Superintending Engineer, Maharashtra State Electricity Board and V ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2010(1)MhLj649

S.S. Shinde, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the final judgment and order dated 7.4.1997 passed by the Labour Court in complaint (ULP) No. 57 of 1995 and the judgment and order dated 30.11.2001 passed by the Member, Industrial Court in revision (ULP) No. 34 of 1997.2. The background facts of the case are as under;In 1976, the respondent was appointed as junior clerk with the petitioners. As a result of criminal case filed against the respondent he was arrested and put under suspension. Accordingly after trial, the respondent was convicted. He therefore, filed appeal aggrieved by the conviction order. It is the case of the petitioners herein that as per the regulation 10-A of the Maharashtra State Electricity Board Employees Service Regulation, departmental proceedings are not required to be conducted. Respondent herein took objection to the circular dated 8.4.1993 which shows that if sentence is suspended in appeal no action of termination be taken. The complaint was filed ...

Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. Through the Assistant General Manager V ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2010(1)MhLj506

V. Mohta, J.1. The Petitioner has invoked Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Act) and challenged the award dated 10/05/2008 passed by the sole arbitrator which is concluded as under:Conclusion:Taking into consideration, the above mentioned points and statements of claimant, submission of respondent's reply, affidavit and considering facts and figures enlightened by both the parties, the Arbitrator decided to give benefit of doubt to the respondent/Plaintiff (Abdul Rahim Mohd. Yasin) because the Claimant (MTNL) have failed to prove without reasonable doubt that the disputed telephone at the relevant time was installed and/or functioning from the suit premises belonging to the respondent. The Claimant had not submitted any Bonafide verification of Telephone No: 3092133 at the 'suit premises'. The Respondent denied for the use of telephone No. : 3092133 in support of that he submitted the affidavit. Further, the Claimant failed and neglected to initia...

Mrs. Nishita Ashish Khadakban, Prop of M/S. Ark Electronic and Compute ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Oral Order:- Per Shri P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member. Heard Advocate Mr. Milind Thenge for the Appellant. There is no need to issue notice to the other parties. This appeal has been filed just to seek enhancement in the order passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Central Mumbai District. The Complainant had approached Hindustan Times. There was a scheme of Hindustan Times whereby they had offered supply of newspapers for two years, initially at the rate of Rs.350/- per year and as per scheme for two years this consistent rate was given to the customers. The appellant paid subscription for this scheme. Initially for one year they had supplied newspaper on the annual fees of Rs.350/-, but, next year, though it was for 2 years, the said scheme was not renewed. She was asked to pay something more. Therefore, she approached District Forum by filing consumer complaint. The matter was decided ex-parte, since none appeared after service of notice on both the Oppon...

Mr. Mulloli Muhammadali, Karim Store, Vatsalatai Naik Nagar, Mumbai Vs ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Mr. P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member 1) The complainant has filed this complaint against M/s. Air Lanka Company Limited and its Sales Manager and also impleaded Akbar Travels of India, the ticketing agent of O.P.No.1 and 2. According to the complainant, he is an indian citizen holding valid passport and at the material time he is having a business of selling fruits and vegetables at Bahrain. He pleaded that O.P.No.1 and 2 is Sri Lankan national carrier and O.P.No.3 is authorised booking agent of O.P.No.1. According to the complainant he had reserved flight tickets on Air Lanka through O.P.No.3 Akbar Travels of India on 6/4/1999 by flight No.UL-142. He was to go from Mumbai To Colombo at 12.20 p.m. On the same day by flight No.UL-201 he was to go from Colombo to Bahrain at 5.00 p.m. His ticket No.603 44043067423 was confirmed for the entire journey. He was also issued boarding pass for seat No.17 E in flight No.UL-142 by O.P.No.1. The complainant pleaded that he rep...

Santosh Dadu Sapkale Vs. the State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(111)BomLR4435

Roshan Dalvi, J.1. The appellant has challenged the judgment of the Second Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, dated 4.12.2003 in Sessions Case No. 84 of 2003, under which the appellant was convicted of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-and in default of the payment of fine, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.2. The prosecution case is that the appellant committed murder of his wife by pouring kerosene on her person and setting her on flames in their matrimonial home on 25.7.2002 as he suspected her of having an affair with a neighborhood boy, one Rajendra. This aspect has been shown by the prosecution in the dying declaration of the deceased Meera, which has been recorded by the police officer who was sent by the concerned Police Station upon being informed of the medico-legal case noticed by the hospital and which statement has been treated as her FIR, up...