Mumbai Court March 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.
M/S.Formac Engineering Ltd and anr Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greate ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-10-2011
:1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have claimed the following reliefs: "(a) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or a writ, direction or order in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, calling for the records of the petitioner's case and after considering the same, quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 21st September 2010; (b) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to order and direct:(i) the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 from in any manner implementing the impugned order dated 21st September 2010;(ii) restraining the respondent Nos.1,2 and 3 from in any manner acting in furtherance of the impugned order dated 21...
Babasaheb S/O Raosaheb Malba Vs. Raosaheb S/O Dattatraya Bandgar and o ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-09-2011
Oral Judgment 01. Heard learned counsel for the parties.02. Present second appeal is preferred by the appellant (Original Defendant No.1) against the judgment and order of dismissal of Regular Civil Appeal No. 7 of 1987 rendered by the learned Additional District Judge, Osmanabad, on 26.4.1988, confirming the judgment and decree dated 12.12.1986 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Tuljapur, in Regular Civil Suit No. 5 of 1978. Accordingly, there are concurrent findings against the present appellant. The parties are hereinafter referred to as per their original status as Plaintiffs and Defendants.03. Plaintiffs filed suit against the defendants, seeking declaration of their ownership to the agricultural land bearing survey No.7 admeasuriang 2 acres 38 gunthas, situate at village Sindhphal, and that the plaintiffs are the owners and in possession of the said land ("hereinafter, referred to as "the suit land"). 04. Plaintiffs came with the case that, being the owners and p...
Eurotex Industries and Exports Limited and anr. Vs. Union of India and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-09-2011
: 1. Rule, returnable forthwith. By consent taken up for final hearing.2. In all these writ petitions, validity of the office memorandum / press release dated 1122010, notification dated 22122010 issued under Section 5 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 ("1992 Act" for short) and validity of the policy circular dated 22122010 issued by the Director General of Foreign Trade ("DGFT" for short) are challenged. Since the basic dispute in all these writ petitions is common, all these writ petitions are heard together and disposed off by this common judgment.3. The petitioners are engaged in the manufacture / export of cotton yarn. In all the Foreign Trade Policy ("FTP" for short) announced by the Central Government from timetotime, cotton yarn was freely exportable. For manufacture and export of cotton yarn, the petitioners have large establishments and have engaged thousands of workers. 4. Para 2.1 of the current policy i.e. FTP 20092014 announced by the Central G...
Force Motors Ltd., Pune Vs. Shantilal Hukumchand Sancheti and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-08-2011
:1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, by consent.2. Once again the vexed question as to what could be considered as an incidental issue in an application under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (for short "the I.D. Act"), arises for determination in the present Petition.3. The first respondent, (hereinafter referred to as "the workman"), was employed with the petitioner, (hereinafter referred to as "the Company"), from 5th October, 1970. He was recruited as a "Junior Clerk" in the Traffic Department. He was later re designated as a "Senior Assistant" on 1st November, 1979. Thereafter, he was transferred to the Stores Department on 14th January, 1980. The Company dismissed the workman on 7th August, 1982 for having committed gross misconduct of insubordination and disobedience. Aggrieved by that order, the workman preferred Complaint (ULP) No.51 of 1988, which was allowed partly by the Labour Court, Pune. The Company was directed to reinstate the workman with con...
Shaikh Salim/O Shaikh Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-07-2011
ORAL :1. The appeal is filed by the appellant accused, challenging the judgment and order dated 30101999 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Beed in Sessions Case No.99 of 1999.2. The prosecution case, in nutshell, is as under:The complainant (P.W.1) Ramprasad Raut, resident of Pali, was serving at Sanskar Vidyalaya, Beed since 8/10 years prior to the incident which took place on 27111992. The complainant Ramprasad Raut used to attend his office daily at Beed from his native place on bicycle in the morning and used to leave the office at about 200 p.m. On the day of incident, he accordingly after attending his office left the office at about 330 p.m. for proceeding to his village Pali on bicycle which is on Beed Solapur high way, and accordingly, on the way to Pali from Beed, he reached near the office of Dudh dairy where there is a bridge on Beed Solapur road at about 2/45 p.m., approximately i.e. on 27111992. When he reached near the bridge on bicycle, some 4 robbers restrained the...
Shri Salil Anupendra Chaturvedi and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-07-2011
ORDER:1. By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, who is the original complainant in private compliant No.1/2006 pending before the Special Judge taking N.D.P.S. cases at Mumbai, has prayed for setting aside the order passed by the Government to transfer Shri Ramesh D.Khade, Deputy Superintendent of Police, C.I.D. and instead, to appoint some other Officer as the Investigating Officer in that case. The petitioner is also praying for mandatory relief of direction to reinstate Shri Ramesh D.Khade, Deputy Superintendent of Police, State C.I.D. as Investigating Officer and complete the investigation within a stipulated period. This is the principal relief which will have to be answered by us.2. The petitioner, as aforesaid, filed private complaint, in which direction under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (`Cr.P.C.') was issued on 21st April, 2007. In view of certain developments, the State decided to hand over the investigation of ...
Masaji S/O Gyanoji Thoke Vs. the State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-07-2011
J U D G M E N T :1 This First Appeal is directed against the judgment and award, dated 17.11.1990, rendered by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Hingoli, in Land Acquisition Reference No. 85 of 1987 challenging the said award.2 The factual matrix of the matter is as follows : The appellant (original claimant) owned and possessed House No. 133 of village Borja, Taluka Kalamnuri, District Parbhani, which was acquired by respondent no.1 State of Maharashtra for Upper Penganga Irrigation Project in the year 1990. The acquired area was 30.10 Sq. Mtrs. i.e. 23.50 Sq. Mtrs. built up area and 6.60 Sq. Mtrs. was open space.3 The appellant claimed the compensation to the tune of Rs.90/ per sq. ft.; whereas respondent no.2 the Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded total compensation of Rs.2,178/ i.e. Rs. 5/ to Rs.6/ per sq. ft. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Kalamnuri, District Parbhani, after hearing the appellant/petitioner and the acquiring body passed the award under Section...
Anant Nathu Mankar and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-07-2011
: 1 This appeal assails the judgment and order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Mangaon, District Raigad convicting the appellants of the offences punishable under Sections 307, 506, 504 all read with Section 34 of I.P.C. in Sessions Case No. 68 of 2008 on 29.9.2010. 2 Impugned judgment dealing with the incident of throwing burning kerosene lamp by the appellant-accused no.2 Alka on the complainant Rakesh, 18 years student residing at village Mulshi, Taluka Sudhagad preceded by hurling of abuses and insults by the appellants- accused in the evening of Holi day i.e. 18.3.2008 gave rise to the present case. As a result of the said acts of the appellants-accused, the prosecution contended, the terricot shirt of the victim Rakesh caught fire and consequently the victim sustained 25 to 30% burn injuries on the chest, abdomen and hands. At the Primary Health Centre situated at Jambool Pada, where the victim was initially removed, the police recorded the statement of the victim, and followin...
Shaikh Khaled S/O Shaikh Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-07-2011
ORAL :1. The appeal is filed by the appellant accused, challenging the judgment and order dated 30101999 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Beed in Sessions Case No.99 of 1999.2. The prosecution case, in nutshell, is as under:The complainant (P.W.1) Ramprasad Raut, resident of Pali, was serving at Sanskar Vidyalaya, Beed since 8/10 years prior to the incident which took place on 27111992. The complainant Ramprasad Raut used to attend his office daily at Beed from his native place on bicycle in the morning and used to leave the office at about 200 p.m.On the day of incident, he accordingly after attending his office left the office at about 330 p.m. for proceeding to his village Pali on bicycle which is on Beed Solapur high way, and accordingly, on the way to Pali from Beed, he reached near the office of Dudh dairy where there is a bridge on Beed Solapur road at about 2/45 p.m., approximately i.e. on 27111992. When he reached near the bridge on bicycle, some 4 robbers restrained the ...
Prakash S/O Madhavrao Patil Vs. the State of MaharashtrA.
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-07-2011
ORAL :1. The appeal is filed by the appellant accused, challenging the judgment and order dated 26031999 passed by the learned IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon in Sessions Case No.131 of 1992.2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:Complainant Nitin (P.W.1) resides with his father Badrinarayan (P.W.2) at Parekh Park area of Jalgaon. In the night between 18th and 19th September, 1990, at about 300 a.m. their bell rang. However, they did not open the door. Thereafter, half an hour again the door bail rang. They suspected that there may be thieves. Both, the father and son, opened the rear door of the house, came out and went towards the entrance door. They saw three persons standing in the premises of their house in front of the door. Two persons fled. They caught the third. He was having a knife in his hand having covered his face with a cloth piece. At that time, he assaulted complainant Nitin with the knife on his head and caused him injuries. He also caused injury ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »