Mumbai Court August 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.
Smt. Dewaltai Wife of Tulshidas Nandgawe. Vs. State of MaharashtrA.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-2011
ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. Heard Mr. M. P. Khajanchi, learned counsel for Appellant and Mr. M. K. Pathan, learned APP for Respondent. 2. The petitioner has questioned validity and legality of the Judgment and Order dated 29/06/2009 passed by the learned Extra Joint Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur, in Criminal Appeal No. 31/2003, and Judgment and Order dated 15/03/2003, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandrapur in Regular Criminal Case No. 85/2001. 3. Heard submissions on behalf of the petitioner and respondent-State. 4. It appears that the petitioner who was original accused no. 2 was facing charge for an offence punishable under Sections 409, 420, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, in respect of the alleged misappropriation of an amount of Rs. 42,729/-. According to the petitioner, the amount of Rs. 42,729/- stood repaid to Government Treasury by original accused no. 1 - Tulshidas Tanbaji Nandgawe (husband of the petitioner) vide Exh.20. T...
Mrs. Avan Cyrus Bhathena and ors Vs. I.T.C. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-2011
JUDGMENT 1. Plaintiff No.1 held 800 shares of Defendant No.1 Company. Plaintiff Nos.2 & 3 are the mother and sister of Plaintiff No.1. A certain oral family arrangement was entered into by and between these parties. Plaintiff No.1 agreed to transfer shares in three lots of 300, 300 and 200 to the other family members. This Suit is not concerned with the family arrangement. The relevant Share Transfer Forms were executed and submitted by Plaintiff No.3 acting on behalf of all the parties to their broker, Defendant No.11 along with original share certificates and the transfer fee of Rs.2550/- and other incidental expenses. Defendant No.11 handed over the relevant documents and the fees to Defendant No.12 who is the share transfer agent. Defendant No.12 forwarded the documents to Defendant No.1 Company. 2. It is the case of the Plaintiffs' that the relevant documents did not reach Defendant No.1 but were intercepted during transmission by post and 600 shares have been wrongly transfer...
Both Resident of 611, Kasewadi Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-2011
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER A.R.JOSHI,J.) : 1. Heard rival arguments at length on this Appeal preferred by the Appellants/original accused Nos.1 & 2. Both the appellants were convicted in Sessions Case No.489 of 2002 vide order dated 30.12.2003 passed by the 3rd Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Pune. By the impugned judgment and order in Sessions Case No.489 of 2002 both the present appellants / accused Nos.1 & 2 were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and were directed to pay fine of Rs.500/- each, in default of payment of fine to suffer R.I. For six months each. In the said Sessions Case, total six accused were tried. However, accused Nos.3 to 6 were acquitted of all the charges. Admittedly, since date of arrest i.e. since 14.7.2002 both the appellants / accused Nos.1 & 2 were in jail and as such after the judgment and order of conviction they are still in jail till da...
Radhakisan Son of Waman Patol Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-2011
ORAL JUDGMENT : - 1 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, taken up for final hearing. 2 The petitioner filed present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and prayed that the externment order, dated 22.10.2010, passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Aurangabad and the judgment and order, dated 24.2.2011, passed by respondent no.3 in appeal be quashed and set aside. 3 The petitioner claims to be the resident of Wadgaon (Kolhati), Taluka and District Aurangabad; whereas respondent no.1 is the State of Maharashtra represented through the Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and respondent no.2 is the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone, Aurangabad; whereas respondent no.3 is the Principal Secretary (Appeal and Security), Mantralaya, Mumbai. 4 The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Chhawani Division, Aurangabad slapped a show cause notice, dated 14.8.2010 and the copy of said show cause notice is prod...
Dr. Bhimrao Trimbakrao Munde. Vs. the Marathwada Agricultural.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-2011
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER SMT. MHATRE, J.) Rule. Rule returnable forthwith, by consent. 1. The Petition has been filed by a retired employee of the Respondent no.1-University for payment of his pension in accordance with the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as "the Pension Rules"). 2. The brief facts giving rise to the present Petition are as follows : The petitioner joined the services as a Medical Officer on 15th February, 1979 with the University. Though the appointment of the petitioner was on a temporary basis, he was continued in service every year with a technical break up to the year 1992. In June, 1992, the petitioner was not continued in service. He was replaced by a temporary employee. He, therefore, preferred Writ Petition no. 1352 of 1992, challenging that order. Due to the interim relief granted by this Court, the petitioner continued in service on the same terms and conditions. The Writ Petition was finally heard on 14th September, 2004....
Babubhai at Irfan So. A. Habib at Bababhai Sheikh Vs. State of Maharas ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-2011
ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. Heard Mr. V. D. Muley, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. M. K. Pathan, learned APP for Respondent-State. 2. By means of this application, the applicant has prayed to quash and set aside the order dated 21/08/2010 below exhibit 48 and order dated 24/08/2010 below exhibit 50 passed by the learned 3 rd Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhandara in Reg. Criminal Case No. 165 of 2006. 3. It appears that the applicant was facing trial upon accusation punishable under Section 324 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Accordingly, the trial Magistrate had, on 31/08/2007, framed charge against the applicant and one Abdul Habib alias Bababhai Sheikh, under Section 324 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. It appears that in the course of trial after some witnesses were examined; in the course of evidence of medical witness i.e. PW-2 - Dr. Nitin Devendra Turaskar, when he was questioned about preliminary injury report (exh. 37), he deposed abo...
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation. Vs. Comex Services S.a
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-2011
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER D.K. DESHMUKH J.) :- 1] The appellants are a Public Sector Company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1959 engaged in oil exploration, development and production of oil and natural gas. The appellants have their principal office at Tel Bhavan, Dehradun, Uttar Pradesh and Regional Office at BRBC, Bandra, Bombay 400 054. The contract between the parties is governed by the laws of India.2] By the arbitration petition No.107 of 1997, the appellants petitioners were seeking to set aside the award dated 27th March 1997 in the matter of disputes and differences between the appellants and respondents as the award consists manifest errors, erroneous assumptions on the face of the record. 3] These proceedings had been referred to an Umpire by the learned Arbitrators on a difference arising between them on some of the issues involved in the case. Both the learned Arbitrators agreed that the appellants wrongfully repudiated the contract between them and the respondents c...
Akola Municipal Corporation Vs. Registrar, National Consumer.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-2011
ORAL JUDGMENT : 1) Rule, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties made returnable forthwith and heard. 2) The above petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the order dated 30/12/2010 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Amravati whereby the Application filed by the petitioner for grant of leave under Section 107 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 for joining the Liquidator as a party respondent to the proceedings filed by the petitioner before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission came to be rejected. 3) A few facts necessary for adjudication of the above petition can be stated thus : The petitioner herein had deposited an amount of Rs.1,31,00,000/- with the respondent no.1 Bank in a fixed deposit for 31 days, which deposit was to carry interest at the rate of 9.5% per annum. Though the said amount was asked to be refunded by the petitioner, the respondent no.1 did...
Raya Gopal Moon Vs. the State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-02-2011
1] Rule. By consent of Mr. N.S. Bhat, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. T.A. Mirza, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents, rule is made returnable forthwith and the matter is heard finally. 2] The petitioner has been convicted in two cases. The prayer of the petitioner is that the sentence of imprisonment imposed on him in the two cases be made concurrent. The first case is Criminal Case No. 127/02 which was decided by the learned J.M.F.C., Pulgaon by judgment and order dated 20.10.2004. In this case, he was convicted under Section 380 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for 2 years. Being aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No. 47/2004 before Sessions Court, Wardha. The appeal was dismissed by judgment and order dated 16.9.2009. The conviction under Section 380 and the sentence was maintained. 3] In the second case by judgment and order dated 12.1.2007 in Sessions Trial No. 155/05 the petitioner wa...
Gopichand and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-02-2011
1. One suspect Nitin Patil died in custody of police. The remand to police custody, which was last in sequence, was sought by Police for investigation of a crime registered by Police Station, Ramtek. This petition is filed by father, mother, wife and younger brother of deceased Nitin Patil. 2. Petitioners claim various reliefs on account of custodial death of Nitin Patil. 3. The factual aspects relied upon by the petitioners are summarized as follows:- [a] In the year 2000, Nitin was waiting at the bus stop while on way to hostel at Ramtek. He was arrested by Kanhan police and was falsely implicated in six criminal cases. [b] At the time of opposing bail, the police had painted Nitin Patil as a 'habitual offender'. Therefore, Court had imposed a condition of reporting to Police Station with certain intervals, when he was released on bail in all these cases. [c] While in the process of reporting for attendance, police at Kanhan Police Station deployed him for collecting bribe money from...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »