Mumbai Court July 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.
The State of Maharashtra Vs. Sk. Isaq Sk. Ahmed and anr.
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-01-2011
1. The appellant / State has preferred the present appeal for enhancement of sentence under Section 377(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, imposed upon respondent nos.1 and 2 herein. It appears that the respondent nos.1 and 2 herein are original accused nos.1 and 3 in Sessions Case No. 201/1999, who faced the trial along with other four accused for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307, read with Section 149 of IPC, and alternatively under Section 307, read with Section 34 of IPC, but the other four accused were acquitted in respect of the said charges, by judgment and order dated 10th December 2002, rendered by the learned 1st Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad, whereas respondent nos.1 and 2 herein i.e. original accused nos.1 and 3 came to be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC, and were sentenced to suffer imprisonment till rising of the court, and were directed to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-, each, in default of payment of fin...
National Polymers and Others Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-01-2011
1. Rule, by consent returnable forthwith. With the consent of Counsel and at their request the Petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal. 2. By an order dated 6 April 2001 the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal has directed the Petitioners to deposit an amount of Rs.7 Crores. The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal was moved by the Petitioners for an order of waiver under Section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. An application filed by the Petitioners under Section 17 was earlier dismissed by the Tribunal on 4 February 2011. Against the order of rejection, the Petitioners filed an appeal in which an application for waiver was made. The impugned order decides that application. 3. The Petitioners have challenged the constitutional validity of the provisions of the first and second provisos to Section 18 of the Act on the ground that they are discriminatory. The submission is based on a comparison with t...
Chief Officer, Nagar Parishad and anr. Vs. Smt. Pratibha Pradip Gaikwa ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-01-2011
1) Rule, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties made returnable forthwith and heard. 2) This petition takes exception to the order dated 22/3/2011 passed by the learned Member of the Industrial Court, Yavatmal whereby the revision application filed by the respondent herein came to be allowed and the respondent was directed to be reinstated till the decision in the Complaint (ULP) filed by her. 3) The respondent herein is the wife of one Pradip Sadashiv Gaikwad, who was initially appointed in the Construction Department of the Municipal Council on the post of Coolie and lastly working in the Health Department of the Municipal Council. The husband of the respondent died on 20/7/2005 while so working. As per recommendations of the Committee, known as Lad Committee, the respondent herein was appointed on the post which fell vacant on the death of her husband. The respondent accordingly joined in the post of Sweeper/Coolie in the Health Department of the Municipal Council ...
Vishnu S/O Keshav Sanap Vs. Bhagwan S/O Vithoba Ingale and ors.
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-01-2011
1) The above petition takes exception to the order dated 6th July, 1995 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati, by which order the revision application filed by the respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein came to be allowed and the revenue entries in question came to be set aside. 2) The facts necessary to be cited for decision in the above petition can be stated thus. The petitioner herein along with his brother Subhash Sanap claims to be in possession of Survey No.91/1, 91/2, admeasuring 6 acres and 28 gunthas at Mouza Khalegaon, Taluka Lonar, District Buldhana. The said survey numbers were originally part of Survey No.91 owned by one Balwant Piraji Ingale and Ram Piraji Ingale. At present the said survey number bears Gat No.547. 3) It appears that Vithoba alias Anand Ingale i.e. the father of the respondent Nos.1 and 2 along with the respondent No.3 moved an application before the Naib Tahsildar, Lonar for correction of the entries in the crop statement for the year...
M/S Shonkh Technology International Ltd. Vs. State Information Commiss ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-01-2011
1 These Writ Petitions were heard together. Since common arguments were canvassed and common questions are involved, they are disposed of by this judgment. 2 Rule. The Respondents waive service. By consent, heard forthwith. 3 The petitions impugn the orders dated 23.03.2011 passed by the State Information Commissioner, Konkan Region. The proceedings are under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter for short referred to as "RTI Act"). 4 The Petitioner in Writ Petition No.2912/2011 is a company incorporated and registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956. It functions as a service provider to the Government of Maharashtra. It provides the facility of Smart Card based Registration Certificate. It is stated that considering the need for computerization, the Government switched over to the latest technology in it's various departments. In the transport sector, the Government aimed at modernizing the Regional Transport Offices and introduced a policy to computerize the Regional ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›