Mumbai Court January 2011 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.
Shunk Corrugators Pvt.Ltd. and 5 ors. Vs. the Bharat Co-op. Bank (Mumb ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-07-2011
ORAL :1 Admit.2 Heard finally by consent.3 The petitioners have challenged the impugned award dated 21st April 2010 passed by the learned Arbitrator appointed under Section 84(4) of the Multi-state Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 on the application/reference filed by the respondent/Bank in view of the dispute raised regarding various monetary claims.4 The learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Bank submits that the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) are applicable to the proceedings initiated under Section 84(4) of the Multi-state Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 (MSCS Act). Therefore, in view of Section 19 of the Arbitration Act, the Arbitrator need not follow the procedure of taking evidence strictly in accordance with the Code of Civil Procedure and/or the Evidence Act. The certified copies of the documents have been relied upon by the Arbitrator instead of originals as they were not available as the same were in the custody of police offici...
Sk. Khaja S/O Sk. Dawood Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-07-2011
:1 This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and order of conviction dated 31.3.1999 passed by the learned 3rd Additonal Sessions Judge, Nanded in Sessions Case No. 183 of 1996.2 It is the case of the prosecution that the complainant police Head Constable Mohammad Khan, B.No. 843 was attached to police station, Itwara, Nanded in the year 1995. P.W.6 Kamalbai Gupta and 8 to 10 other persons from Vinkar colony Nanded had filed a complaint against the appellant Sk. Khaja with police station, Nanded on 10.3.1995 alleging that the accused is demanding ransom and threatening the public. Therefore, P.W.7 police Inspector, Surendra Mandhane who was police Station Officer of police station, Itwara, Nanded ordered the complainant P.W.2 to bring accused Sk. Khan in the police station for enquiry in connection with the complaint filed by P.W.6 Kamalbai Gupta and others against the accused. Complainant, P.W.2 Mohammad Khan Pathan and his colleagues namely P.W.3 Nandkumar Pande and other police ...
ivory Properties and Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Nusli Neville WadiA.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-07-2011
ORAL :1. This is an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.2.An agreement was entered into between the Applicant and the Respondent on 2 January 1995. Under the agreement, the Applicant undertook to develop certain immovable property and to sell the constructed area, for which the Respondent was to receive 12% in the amount realised from the sale. Under the agreement, a certain amount was guaranteed as a minimum guarantee payment for a term of ten years. The agreement contemplates that the Applicant would be entitled to sell or transfer units in the constructed area to third parties. The Respondent was to be entitled to receive all the gross realizations from the disposal or transfer of the constructed area so that 12% of the realization would be receivable directly from the purchasers. In this manner, 12% of the realization would belong to the Respondent while the balance representing 88% would belong to the Applicant.3.Disputes and differences a...
L.The Cuffe Parade Residents Association. and ors. Vs. the State of Ma ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-06-2011
ORAL : 1.By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are making grievance against the Government Resolution dated 8.1.1990 deciding to grant lease of the land in City Survey no.646 admeasuring 5736.77 sq.mts., Backbay Reclamation Block 5, Colaba Division, Bombay. The facts that are relevant and material for deciding this petition are that the petitioner no.1 is an Association registered under the Societies Registration Act having residents of Cuffe Parade area as its members. The petitioner nos.2 and 3 are members of petitioner no.1. The land admeasuring 5736.77 sq.mts. from Block no.5, Backbay Reclamation vests in the Government of Maharashtra. The State Government, by Resolution dated 12.3.1980 decided to grant lease of this land for a period of 99 years to the Bombay Municipal Corporation. The ground rent was fixed at Rs.1/- per annum. The Corporation was to pay an amount of Rs.5,01,965/to the Government towards the cost incurred by the Gov...
Amol S/O Late Bhalchandra Joshi and ors. Vs. Deorao S/O Santoshrao Bho ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jan-06-2011
Judgment :1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally by the consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties. 2. All these three matters challenge the common order passed on 21-8-2009 by the learned 4th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur, dismissing the application Exhibit 1 in Special Darkhast No.118 of 1995 and allowing the applications Exhibits 1 and 6 filed in Special Darkhast No.156 of 1995. The Executing Court has proceeded further in Special Darkhast No.156 of 1995 and the judgment-debtors in the said Darkhast are directed to execute and register the sale-deed of the suit property in favour of the applicant, after rejecting the objections at Exhibits 19, 70 and 159, to the executability of decree raised by the petitioners in all these three matters. The proceedings before the lower Court are stayed.3. The facts leading to the case are as under :The property in dispute (suit property) is the land admeasuring about 18.07 acres, bearing Survey Nos.53 and 54 out o...
Amol S/O Late Bhalchandra Joshi and ors.Vs. Deorao S/O Santoshrao Bhon ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jan-06-2011
Judgment :1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally by the consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties. 2. All these three matters challenge the common order passed on 21-8-2009 by the learned 4th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur, dismissing the application Exhibit 1 in Special Darkhast No.118 of 1995 and allowing the applications Exhibits 1 and 6 filed in Special Darkhast No.156 of 1995. The Executing Court has proceeded further in Special Darkhast No.156 of 1995 and the judgment-debtors in the said Darkhast are directed to execute and register the sale-deed of the suit property in favour of the applicant, after rejecting the objections at Exhibits 19, 70 and 159, to the executability of decree raised by the petitioners in all these three matters. The proceedings before the lower Court are stayed.3. The facts leading to the case are as under :The property in dispute (suit property) is the land admeasuring about 18.07 acres, bearing Survey Nos.53 and 54 out o...
Smt. Saraswati W/O. Shivnath Mundada and ors. Vs. Smt. Surajbai W/O. R ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-06-2011
ORAL :1. Mr. C.V. Korhalkar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, states that some amendment in cause title of the petition is already permitted and inadvertently, he could not carry out the same. He, therefore, seeks leave to carry out the amendment immediately. Mr. S.D. Kulkarni, learned Counsel appearing for respondent nos.1/1 to 1/5, has no objection. Hence, leave granted. Necessary amendment be effected immediately.2. By this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners / tenants are assailing the judgment dated 2nd January 1990, delivered by the learned 3rd Additional District Judge, Ahmednagar, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 144 of 1986. That appeal was filed by the petitioner, challenging the judgment and decree dated 23-9-1985, passed by the learned IInd Joint Civil Judge (Junior Division) & J.M.F.C., Kopargaon, in Civil Suit No. 457 of 1979. The present respondent nos.1, 2 and 3 instituted that suit for possession of suit premises on a...
Shakuntalabai Wd/O Khairuprasad Joshi and anr. Vs. the State of Mahara ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-06-2011
: (PER A.P BHANGALE, J.):1. This Appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 15-04-1997 passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Sessions Case No. 464 of 1992 whereby the appellant was convicted for offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life. While the Appeal remained pending, appellant no 1 died and, therefore, Appeal has abated as against the Appellant no 1.2. Case of the prosecution in brief, is that the appellant is bother of Birju Joshi, who is the husband of deceased Mrs. Prabhabai Joshi. The deceased had married with Birju Joshi about 7 years prior to the incident since 22-02-1985. Telephonic message was received by PSO Lanjewar, Head Constable of Kamptee Police Station on 4-6-1992 that Mrs Prabhabai was admitted in Ward No. 3 of Mayo Hospital , Nagpur in a burnt condition. Shri Lanjewar (PW-7) went to Mayo Hospital and recorded Statement of Prabhabai. She stated that she had sustained injuries a...
Gangyya S/O Khandyya Vs. Gangadhar S/O Tanaji and anr.
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-05-2011
ORAL :1. By this Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-tenant has questioned the order of the Maharashra Revenue Tribunal dated 29.12.1989 delivered in Revision. The office of M.R.T. has registered proceedings as Appeal No. 14-A.87.P. In view of the short contentions raised before this Court, it is not necessary to refer to the facts at length.2. Advocate Shri Naik for the petitioner has contended that the status as protected tenant is not in dispute and hence rejection of application filed under Section 98 of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 ( For short, hereinafter referred as 'Hyderabad Act') only on the ground that he did not approach the competent authority under Section 32 for restoration of possession, is arbitrary and unwarranted. According to the learned counsel, it constitutes failure to exercise jurisdiction.3. Advocate Salunke for respondent no.1 has briefly invited my attention to the previous history. He conten...
Zarine Mangesh Edekar. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-05-2011
ORAL : 1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner has challenged the assessment order under Expenditure Tax Act, 1987 in respect of the payments made by him to the Hotel Corporation of India Ltd. -respondent No.3 herein under the licence agreement dated 6th March, 1987. Under the said licence agreement the petitioner was conducting the business of beauty parlour and barber saloon in an area admeasuring 740.35 sq. ft. approximately on the ground floor of the said Hotel near Mumbai Air Port. The petitioner had to pay to the respondent a sum of Rs.13,400/- per calender month as and by way of licence fee and further a sum of Rs.8,884/- as and by way of service charges for air conditioning and maintenance of the public area in front of the shop aggregating to Rs.22,284/- per month and also monthly compensation of Rs.1500/- as rent for imported/indigenous beauty parlour/barber saloon equipment, fixtures and fittings in the shop on quarterly basis. The petitioner...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »