Mumbai Court October 2012 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.
Nandini J. Shah and Another Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-12-2012
N.M. Jamdar, J. This appeal takes exception to the order passed by the learned Single Judge confirming the order of eviction passed against the appellants by the Estate Officer under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 in favour of the Respondents-Life Corporation of India. 2. The Respondent Life Insurance Corporation has sought eviction of the appellants on the ground that the recorded tenant-Smt.Vilasben Shah who was the mother of appellant No.1 had sublet the premises in favour of three private limited companies and the appellant No.2 partnership firm. 3. The premises in question is an office admeasuring 258 sq.ft. The building in which it is situated is almost 100 years old. The building belongs to Respondent-Corporation. The premises have been in the use of the family of the appellants as a tenant for last several decades. Since prior to 1937, P.T.Shah, the grand-father of appellant No.1 was the tenant of the premises. P.T.Shah was practising as an ...
Sou.Kanchan Shivaji Atigre Vs. Mahadev Baban Ranjagane and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-12-2012
Rule. This writ petition under Article 226 and Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune in Gram Panchayat Appeal/Kolhapur/185 of 2011. 2} That appeal was directed against the order passed by the Additional Collector, Kolhapur in dispute/complaint bearing No.8 of 2011 decided on 25th October 2011. 3} The Additional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune while allowing the appeal has held that the petitioner is disqualified under section 14(1)(j-3) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958 (for short the Act). This is a disqualification incurred on account of encroachment made upon government land or public property. 4} A complaint was made by the respondent No.1 that Gram Panchayat Padwalwadi is the Gram Panchayat in question. Its elections were notified and the complainant is a voter/elector for the said elections. That election was held on 27th June 2010. The petitioner contested the said election from...
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. Vs. M/S. Dinamic Corporation
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-12-2012
Oral Judgment: (Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) The present Motion is for condoning a delay of sixty days in filing an Appeal against an order of a learned Single Judge arising out of a Petition for setting aside an arbitral Award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. When the Motion came up on Board for hearing, Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant relied on a judgment of a Single Judge of this Court in Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. vs. Jagson International Ltd. (2005(3) Mh.L.J. 1141)and urged that since the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has not prescribed any limitation for filing an appeal under Section 37(1)(b) against an order setting aside or refusing to set aside an arbitral Award under Section 34, such an appeal would not be governed by the Limitation Act, 1963. On the basis of the judgment of the learned Single Judge in ONGC vs. Jagson International Ltd. it was sought to be urged that an appeal could be filed within a reasonable peri...
Waman Ramchandra Bhayde and Others Vs. Kanta Narayan Patel and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-12-2012
Oral Judgment: 1. The Plaintiff/Landlord has filed this Appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 of CPC challenging the Order passed below Exhibit 49 in Civil Appeal No.113 of 1997 preferred by the Respondents-Tenants granting his Review Application and permitting him to amend his Written Statement subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- before the Appellate Court. 2. It appears that initially the challenge was presented as a Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The same was registered as Writ Petition No.6994 of 2003. This Court admitted it and granted interim relief on 14.11.2003 and later permitted the same to be converted into Appeal against Order in view of the provisions of Order 43 Rule 1 (w) of C.P .C. vide its order dated 13.4.2010. 3. Learned Counsel for the Appellants/ Landlord points out that R.C.S. No.20 of 1995 was filed by the Landlords pointing out that the tenant had discontinued payment of rent form April 1990 and was a defaulter. The tenant filed his ...
Nilconta Gangadhar Sinai Amonkar, S/O Late Gangadhar Amonkar Vs. Vivek ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-12-2012
Oral Judgment: Heard Shri Nitin Sardessai, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri P. A. Kamat, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. Rule. Heard forthwith by consent of the learned Counsel. 3. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondents waives service. 4. The above petition challenges an order dated 09.08.2012 passed by the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Quepem, in Regular Civil Suit No. 59/2006 whereby an application filed by the petitioner for appointment of a commissioner/officer for examining the petitioner by tendering an affidavit in evidence and to admit the documents in evidence under Order 18 Rule 4 and Order 26 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code at Exhibit 40 came to be dismissed. 5. The petitioner filed an application on the ground that the petitioner is more than 87 years old and has undertaken two by-pass surgeries and at present he is confined to his house at Cacora Curchorem, Goa and his movements are totally restricted. It is furth...
Uttam S/O Narsai Patil Vs. Shrikrushna S/O Vishnu Somwanshi and Anothe ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-12-2012
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties, heard for final disposal. 2. Both the petitions are filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to challenge the orders made by Additional Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal No.15/2010 and Criminal Appeal No.16/2010. In the two appeals, applications were moved by respondent / original complainant for directions to the accused to deposit cheque amount. The petitioner is convicted and sentence for the offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Sessions Court directed the petitioner to deposit the entire amount of compensation awarded by Judicial Magistrate (First Class) in both the cases. 3. As per the record, after entertaining two proceedings, this Court gave directions to the petitioner to deposit at least 50% of the compensation amount. The statement was made by advocate for petitioner that in both the cases 50% amount of compensation has been deposited in Sessions Court by the a...
Air France Vs. Dr. A. C. Kothari and Another
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-12-2012
S. R. Khanzode, Presiding Judicial Member [1] This appeal filed by the Appellant/original Complainant, namely Air France (hereinafter referred to as the Appellant for the sake of brevity) takes an exception to an order dated 30/10/2010 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Central Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the Forum for the sake of brevity) in Consumer Complaint No.222 of 2009, Dr. Ajay Chimanlal Kothari and Another Vs. M/s. Air France. [2] Undisputed facts are that the Respondents/original Complainants, namely Dr. Ajay Kothari and Dr. Mrs. Gopa Kothari (hereinafter referred to as the Complainants for the sake of brevity) who are the medical practitioners by profession being frequent air-travelers and are commercially important persons (for the airlines). The Complainants utilizing mileages at their credit booked an air-passage from Mumbai to Naples via Paris for the flight operated by the Appellant for 11/5/2009. They booked an air-passage in the busines...
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation and Another Vs. Natthu S/ ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-11-2012
Oral Judgment: The judgment and award dated 31/10/2002 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur is challenged in this first appeal. 2] One Vinod aged about 22 years, while travelling in city bus on 9.9.1993 fell down and as a result of injuries sustained by him, he died. His parents lodged claim for award of compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-. The learned Tribunal considering the age, income etc. of the deceased awarded compensation of Rs.2,84,136/- inclusive of no-fault liability claim. Aggrieved with this judgment and award the appellant - Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation has filed this appeal. 3] Mr. Charpe, learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the Tribunal committed an error while assuming the loss of dependency and also wrongly applied the multiplier of 17. 4] Mr. Pophaly, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, supported the judgment and award. 5] The point that arises for my consideration is: Whether the learned Tribunal has ...
Alok Agarwal and Others Vs. Punam Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-11-2012
Oral Judgment: (Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) This Appeal arises from a decision of a Learned Single Judge on three Notices of Motion taken out by the Sixth and Seventh Defendants: (i) A Notice of Motion questioning the jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the suit and seeking to raise a preliminary issue under Section 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 on the ground that the exclusive jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit would vest with the Co-operative Court by virtue of the provisions of Section 163 read with Section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act 1960 (NM 1564 of 2012); (ii) A Notice of Motion seeking stay of the suit filed before this Court by the First Respondent (NM 471 of 2012); and (iii) A Notice of Motion seeking the rejection of the plaint under clauses (a) and (d) of Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (NM 496 of 2012). 2. By the order impugned in these proceedings the Learned Single Judge has dismissed all the three Notices of Mot...
Dr. Ravikumar S/O Gopalkishan Chetlawar and Another Vs. Smt. Radhabai ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-11-2012
Oral Judgment: 1] The application is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to challenge the order made by JMFC on Exh.5 of M.C.A.No.37/01. In maintenance proceeding filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. the JMFC, Degloor has granted interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.750/- per month in favour of the respondent. Both sides are heard. 2] The challenge to the order of JMFC is mainly on the ground that Smt.Radhabai respondent is the step mother of the petitioners. Argument was advanced that as she is the step mother, the present petitioners are not bound to provide anything for her maintenance even u/s 125 of Cr.P.C. On this point, reliance was placed on the case reported as 1976 Mh.L.J.565 Bombay High Court [Ramabai w/o G.M.Balraj V/s Dinesh s/o G.M.Balraj and another]. In this case, this Court has discussed status of step mother and has interpreted the term “mother” [given in Section 125 of Cr.P.C.] It is observed that the step ...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »