Mumbai Court October 2010 Judgments
The Maharashtra Nagri Sahakari Bank Limited, and anr. Vs. Ravindra S/O ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-29-2010
01. Admit. By consent of learned counsel for the parties, Letters Patent Appeal is taken up for final hearing.02. This Letters Patent Appeal is preferred by the appellants (original Respondent Nos.4 and 5 in Writ Petition No.2957 of 2009), challenging the order dated 8.9.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in the said writ petition, granting Rule and stay to execution, implementation and operation of the recovery certificate dated 21.2.2009 issued by the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 ("for brevity, hereinafter referred as the "Cooperative Act"), under Clause XV of the Letters Patent.03. The facts in nutshell are that the present appellant No.1 is a cooperative bank i.e. financial institution and appellant No.2 is its Special Recovery and Sales Officer. Respondent No.1 and 2 herein are original writ petitioners. Respondent No.1 herein availed overdraft facility from appellant No.1, on 25...
Tag this Judgment!Sahebrao S/O Narayan Kharat, Age 54 Years, and ors. Vs. the Collector, ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-29-2010
01. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard by consent of learned counsel for the parties at the stage of admission. 02. The petitioners who are the members of Municipal Council, Ambad, are raising exception to the order passed by the District Collector, Jalna, holding them disqualified to continue as the members of Municipal Council, in view of the provisions of the Maharashtra Local Authorities Members Disqualification Act 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the "Disqualification Act").03. The general elections of the municipal council were held in the year 2006. The petitioners herein are the elected member of municipal council belonging to Nationalist Congress Party. Initially the President of the Municipal Council, Ambad, was elected for a period of two and half years. The said period came to an end in the year 2009 and the election for remaining term of the Presidentship was held on 20.06.2009. At the elections, one Mrs. Sulbha Kulkarni belonging to Congress Party as well as the peti...
Tag this Judgment!Surjit Fulchand Khandke, Aged About 23 Yrs, and ors. Vs. Vinod Shamrao ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-29-2010
1] Criminal appeal No. 712 of 2004 is arising out of judgment and order dated 21st September 2004 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge Nagpur, passed in Sessions Trial No. 18 of 2003 in which present two appellants, one more accused were tried for the offence punishable under Section 120(B) read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code and also for the offence punishable under Section 4 and 25 of the Arms Act.2] Criminal Appeal No. 412 of 2006 is arising out of another impugned judgment and order dated 9th May 2006 passed by same Court, (2nd Additional Sessions Judge Nagpur). This judgment and order was passed in Sessions Trial No. 112 of 2005 and Sessions Trial No. 306 of 2005 which were clubbed together in which appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 412 of 2006 were facing trial.3] These criminal appeals are arising out of the same incident of assault and murder of deceased Damu. However, there were three sessions trials in which respective accused as mentioned above, faced the trial. In...
Tag this Judgment!Jayawant Chimanrao Kapre Aged 30, and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-29-2010
1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants Jayawant Kapre, Balu alias Sudam Kapre and Trimbak Rambhau Kapre and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents State.2. The Criminal Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 12th January 1989 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, whereby the appellant Jayawant came to be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for life. Accused Jayawant, Balu and Trimbak were convicted under Section 147, 148, 149, 247 and 325 and sentenced to suffer R.I. for five years and were also directed to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default to suffer R.I. for six months. Accused Jayawant and Balu were also convicted along with other co-accused for the offence punishable under Section 147, 148, 149, 447 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to suffer R.I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default to suffer R.I. for ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Maharashtra and anr. Vs. SachIn S. Hundekari.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-29-2010
1. The only question to be determined in this Petition is essentially a question of law relating to the effect of a concession granted by Counsel on behalf of a party to Court which is not in accordance with law.2. The Respondent is the grandson of a Freedom Fighter who was honoured under the Freedom Fighter scheme launched by the Union of India. The widow of the Freedom Fighter who is the Respondent's grandmother nominated the Respondent for Government service.3. The Respondent made an application for service. An inquiry report was called for. The inquiry report shows that the Respondent was dependent on the said widow, his grandmother. His grandmother had expired by then. The Respondent's application was rejected for nomination for Government service.4. The Respondent filed the above Writ Petition challenging the order of the Petitioner herein dated 7th June 2005.5. When the Petition came up for hearing the then Associate Advocate General representing the Government, being the Petiti...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Tanaji Bajirao Chawan, Vs. the State of Maharashtra,
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-29-2010
1. Present Criminal Appeal arose out of judgment and order dated 07/10/2003 passed by learned VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Satara, who found the appellant guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine in the sum of Rs 500/ in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for five months. The appellant was further found guilty of the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, the appellant was sentenced to suffer S.I. for 3 years and to pay fine in the sum of Rs.400/ in default to suffer further S. I. for four months . The appellant was also found guilty of the offence punishable under Section 504 of IPC and sentenced to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay fine in the sum of Rs.200/ in default to undergo R. I. for two months.2. The case of the prosecution briefly stated is as under: Sau Lata @ Ranjana Tanaji Chawan, resident of Kalewadi (Sartale) TaukaJaoli,...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Sanjay Atmaram Gaikwad, Vs. the State of Maharashtra, and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-29-2010
1. Heard Mr. Jahagirdar, the learned senior Advocate with Mr. Bandiwadekar for the petitioner.2. Rule. Respondents waive service.3. The petition has been finally heard with the consent of the parties.4. This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to challenge the order dated 2/12/2009 passed by the Division Bench of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai in Original Application No.1421 of 2009, filed by the respondent No.3 (referred to as the applicant). The applicant came to be appointed as Class-I, Group 'A" officer in the Maharashtra Medical Insurance Services in the pay scale of Rs.10,000/- - 15,000/- as per the Government Resolution dated 18/06/2007 and he joined the said post on 01/09/2007. On the representation dated 19/06/2007 submitted by the petitioner, the State Government posted him as Administrative Medical Officer ESIS, Pune vide its Resolution dated 27/08/2007 and posted the applicant in his place. On 16/09/2009 the applicant subm...
Tag this Judgment!Keru Kisan Rokade. Vs. Geoffery Manners and Co. Ltd.,
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-29-2010
1. The Award in Reference (IDA) No.48 of 1991 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Nasik on 5th January, 1998 has been challenged in this Writ Petition. The said Reference has been dismissed.2. The petitioner was initially appointed on a temporary basis with the respondent-Company. Although his appointment was for a fixed period, he was continued in service from time to time. According to the petitioner, he worked for several years without being made permanent. His services were terminated by the respondent on 5th September, 1989. The petitioner, therefore, approached the machinery available under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (for short "the I.D. Act"), and obtained a Reference for adjudication of his dispute with respect to reinstatement with continuity of service and back-wages.3. In his statement of claim, the petitioner pleaded inter alia that he had worked continuously with the respondent from 4th August, 1984 to 4th September, 1989 and had put in more than 240 day...
Tag this Judgment!Access Textiles Shivnath G. Bhojane and Sons Deepak Jhunjhunwala Vs. C ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-29-2010
Per: P.G. Chacko, M(J) We had directed M/s. Access Textiles to pre-deposit the amount of penalty imposed on them and report compliance on 29.10.2010 vide Order No. S/218-225/10/CSTB/C-II dated 29.07.2010. They have not complied with the above direction, nor is there any representation for them today. Therefore, Appeal No. C/873/08 is dismissed for non-compliance with Section 129E of the Customs Act. 2. We had also directed Shri Deepak Jhunjhunwala to pre-deposit 10% of the amount of penalty imposed on him and report compliance on 29.10.2010. Today, there is no evidence of any such deposit, nor any representation for the appellant. Therefore, Appeal C/875/08 filed by Shri Deepak Jhunjhunwala also gets dismissed for want of compliance with Section 129E of the Customs Act. 3. M/s. Seej India, appellant in Appeal No. C/883/08, have pre-deposited the amount ordered by this Bench under Section 129E of the Customs Act. 4. The learned Counsel for M/s. Shivnath G. Bhojane and Sons (Appellant in...
Tag this Judgment!Deepak @ Oharilal Joshi, Aged About 20 Years, and ors. Vs. the State o ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-28-2010
1. Present criminal appeal is preferred by all the six accused against the judgment and order of conviction passed by 3rd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur. The impugned judgment and order was passed in Sessions Trial No. 422 of 2002 on 6th December 2004. By the said judgment and order, all the six accused were convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 149, 147 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code. The major punishment awarded against the appellants/accused is that of life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 3000/-, in default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and six months and fine of Rs. 500/- for offences each under Sections 147 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused were, however, acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 4 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act and Section 37 (1) read with Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. The State of Maharas...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »