Mumbai Court August 2010 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.
Hasan Geblya Padvi, Age 45 Years, Vs. the State of MaharashtrA.
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Aug-09-2010
1 This appeal is filed challenging the final judgment and order dated 9.5.2008, rendered by the Additonal Sessions Judge, Nandurbar in Sessions Case No. 9 of 2002 (Old S.C. No. 111 of 1994), whereby the appellant is convicted vide section 235(2) of Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of rs.5000/- i.d to suffer R.I. For six months.2 The background facts of the case are as under:- The appellant-accused Hasan Geblya Padvi, is the son of deceased Geblya Rava Padvi. The appellant has two wives namely Babibai (PW 8) and Nirmalabai (PW 4). The accused had been to village Dhanora, Taluka and District Nandurbar, a day before the date of alleged incident alongwith his wife Nirmalabai for attending the local fare. Accused Hasan was having a separate house at Dhanora. He was residing with his two wives whenever he was staying at Dhanora in that house. The appellant used to go to Gujarat State for work. The deceas...
Maharashtra Suraksha Rakshan Aghadi, Vs. State of Maharashtra, Through ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-09-2010
It is agreed by the leaned counsel appearing for the parties that both these writ petitions can be finally disposed of at the admission stage itself. Hence, both these writ petitions are disposed of by this common judgment.2. Rule. Learned AGP and advocates appearing for respective respondents waive service of Rule. With the consent of the parties, Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard.3. Firstly we shall deal with Writ Petition No. 6749 of 2009. 3.1 The petitioner union has prayed for quashing the notification dated 8th April, 2009 issued by the first respondent, a copy whereof is at AnnexureB to the petition, by which exemption has been granted to the Security Guards employed by respondent No.4principal employer under Section 23 of the Maharashtra Private Security Guards (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act, 1981(hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). By the aforesaid notification, the Government granted exemption from the operations of all or any of the provisions of the...
Prabhakar S/O Warlji Uike Aged About 40 Years, Sanjay Narayanrao Wanik ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-09-2010
This appeal is at the instance of original defendants against the judgment and order dated 8th September, 1998 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Wardha in Regular Civil Appeal No. 120/1996 whereby the appeal was dismissed. The said appeal stems from judgment and order passed on 9th September, 1996 passed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Hinghanghat in Regular Civil Suit No. 65/ 1991 which was decreed for possession and injunction.2. Facts in brief are these:The dispute relates to suit house consisting a total of seven rooms bearing Municipal House No. 2 in Swami Vivekanand Ward at village Hinghanghat, District Wardha. The plaintiff had sued defendants to permanently restrain them from obstructing his possession of house property. The suit house was owned by Narayanrao Wanikar (father of defendant no.1). The plaintiff is paying rent of Rs. 40/ per month since more than 15 years. The plaintiff paid rent to Narayanrao, father of first defendant and, after his demise, to...
M/S.Malaysian Airlines. M/S.Saudi Arabian Airlines. and ors Vs. the Un ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-09-2010
1.All these petitions filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are challenging imposition of penalty under section 38(3) of the Finance Act, 1979 ("Finance Act" or "Act" for short) for delay in payment of Foreign Travel Tax ("FTT" for short) to the Government. The facts involved in all these petitions are more or less common and issues involved are identical. Hence all these petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.Facts of W.P.No.17/2004 :2. The petitioner in this petition is a Airline Company engaged in the business of carrying passengers between various locations in India and abroad. The petitioner in the course of its business collected FTT from passengers going abroad in accordance with the Finance Act and Foreign Travel Tax Rules, 1979 framed thereunder ("FTT Rules" for short). The petitioner for the months of April, August, September and December, 2001 failed to pay the FTT within the stipulated period. In vie...
Alpha and Omega Diagnostics India Ltd. Vs. Asset Reconstruction Compan ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-09-2010
1] Rule. Since a short point is involved, with the consent of the parties rule is made returnable forthwith. The learned advocate for respondents waive service.2] By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners are challenging the common order passed by the learned Chairperson of the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), Mumbai in Misc. Appeal No.127 of 2010 and Misc.Appeal No.128 of 2010. The petitioners before us are the original appellants in this appeal whereas the respondents to this petition are the original respondents-applicants. 3] These appeals impugn the common order dated 19th May 2010 passed by the Presiding Officer of Debt Recovery Tribunal II, for short (DRT-II), Mumbai. By this order the DRT allowed the respondents application (Exhibit 188) for amendment in the cause title of the original Application No.89 of 2005 whereas the petitioners' application for dismissal of this original application was rejected. 4] The respondents prefe...
Shri Mohamed Saliah Age 67 Years. Vs. Anna Dani Principal Secretary, t ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-09-2010
1. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for a writ of habeas corpus so as to quash and set aside the order of detention dated 2/8/2008 passed under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short the COFEPOSA Act) issued against the petitioner's son Shri Mohideen Abdul Khader Mohamed Saliah, a residen tof 82, Asadh Nagar, Aminjikarai, Chennai 600 029.2. The said detention order was served on the detenu on 20/10/2009 and the detention period of one year would expire on 19/10/2010. Thus the detenu has been under detention for more than nine months. The detenu had submitted his representations to the competent authorities on 6/11/2009, 16/11/2009 and 21/11/2009. The Advisory Board heard the detenu on 21/11/2009 and the confirmation order was issued by the State Government on 21/12/2009. This petition has been filed on or about 1/2/2010.3. Though various grounds have been raised so as to challenge t...
Ankit Pulps and Boards Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, N ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-09-2010
Per: P.G. Chacko This application seeks waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of duty and penalty. After examining the records and hearing both sides, we find that this is a case fit for summary disposal. Accordingly, after dispensing with pre-deposit, we take up the appeal. 2. The issue involved in this case is whether certain sales tax incentives given by the State Government to manufacturers like the appellant were liable to be abated from the sale price of the excisable goods cleared during the material period. The lower appellate authority did not find prima facie case for the assessee and, therefore, asked them to deposit the entire amount of duty under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act. There was no deposit by the party and consequently their appeal came to be rejected on the ground of non-compliance with Section 35F ibid. The learned counsel submits that this Bench has granted waiver and stay in similar cases earlier vide Hindustan Fastners (P) Ltd. vs. CCE,...
Reserve Bank of IndiA. Vs. Shri Imran Ashraf Furniturewala Chairman, M ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-2010
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. Reserve Bank of India, who is the original complainant, has filed this Revision Application against the order dated 3.8.2009 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 29th Court, Dadar, Mumbai. whereby he refused to issue process against the accused Nos.2 to 10 and accused No.12 in Criminal Case No. 59/SW/2009, who are respondent Nos. 1 to 10 in this Revision Application.3. To state in brief, the accused No.1 - Memon Co-operative Bank is a registered Multi-State Co-op. Society carrying on banking business. Accused No.2 is the Chairman of the said Bank. Accused No.3 is the Vice-Chairman. Accused Nos.4 to 9 are the Directors. Accused No.10 is the Expert Director. Accused No.11 is a General Manager and Chief Executive Officer and accused No.12 is the Special Adviser to the Board of the Directors. Accused No.1, a Co- operative Bank, is entitled to carry on banking business which includes acceptance of deposi...
The State of MaharashtrA. Vs. Gramdevi Kalbhairav Sansthan and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-2010
1) Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2) Two points have been urged before us. The first argument is that the original trustees have been replaced by new trustees. In that case, the claim regarding compensation for house property cannot be pursued by the new trustees. The argument deserves to be stated to be rejected inasmuch as the house property, which is affected on account of 2 45 fa.1648.09 anr acquisition was the property of the Trust. The fact that the trustees have changed does not mean that the right of the Trust to receive compensation for the house property is effaced. That right would enure in favour of the Trust. The compensation to be received by the new trustees would naturally be for and on behalf of the Trust. In the circumstances, there is no substance in this ground. 3) The second ground urged before us is that the compensation provided for the loss of structure as claimed by the claimants is excessive. In the context of this submission, it is further argued ...
Dr. Rakesh S/O Jagdish Ramteke, Aged About 38 Years, Vs. Rashtrasant T ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-06-2010
1] Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard the learned Counsel for the rival parties by consent.2] The petitioner has approached this Court for a direction to the respondent No.1 to forthwith issue an appointment order in the petitioner's favour for the post of Reader in the department of Computer Science in Rashtrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur University in pursuance of the selection process initiated under advertisement dated 13.7.2007.3] In brief, the petitioner's case is that the petitioner appeared for interview in pursuance of the aforesaid advertisement for the said post and was selected by the Selection Committee. At selection, one Shri Pradip Kawaduji Bute was shown at serial no.1 and the petitioner was shown at serial no.2. Eventually, the said Bute's appointment was challenged before the Hon'ble Chancellor of the Nagpur University, who on 7.8.2009 held that his appointment was not legal and directed the Vice Chancellor of the respondent no.1 University to terminate his services...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »