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.
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Tema India Limited and Anothe ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-11-2012
Oral Judgment: The Petitioner, original Respondent, has challenged the Award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Arbitration Act) dated 2 March 2009 passed by the sole Arbitrator. The operative part of the Award is as under:- (a) I direct the Respondent to release and pay to the Claimant the amount of Rs. 2,66,48,000/- withheld by the Respondent out of the bills payable to the Claimant. (b) Not many arguments were made for payment of interest. However, the rate claimed is too high as per today's standards. I, therefore, direct the Respondent to pay to the Claimant interest at the rate of 8% p.a from the date of the submission of the statement of claim i.e. 9th September, 2008 till payment of the awarded amount. (c) The arbitration proceedings were held at the premises of the Respondent. I am not awarding cost to either party in the arbitration and I am directing both the parties to pay their own costs. (d) I am not inclined to pass any award o...
Smt. Anuradha Wd/O Kanthiram Wasnik Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-11-2012
1. Heard rival arguments on earlier dates on this criminal appeal preferred by the original accused (since deceased) challenging the judgment and order of conviction passed on 30/9/2005. Said impugned judgment and order was passed in Special Case No. 15 of 1995 in which, initially there were three accused including the present appellant (since deceased) being original accused No.1, however, accused Nos. 2 and 3 died during the pendency of the matter and as such case against them stood abated leaving behind only accused No.1 to face the trial. By the impugned judgment and order original accused No.1, present appellant (since deceased), was convicted for the offences punishable under Section 7 and also punishable under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three months. Being aggrieved by the sa...
Ku. Pragati D/O Ravindra Thakur Vs. State of Maharashtra Through Its S ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-11-2012
Oral Judgment: (B.R. Gavai, J.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The only ground on which the petitioner's caste claim is rejected is that the caste certificate is issued by the competent Authority to the petitioner at Nagpur whereas the petitioner's forefathers belong to Jalgaon. 3. The issue is no more res integra. The Division Bench of this Court to which one of us, namely, Deshmukh J. is a party, in the case of Niraj Kamlakar More vs. Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad (2012 (9) LJSOFT 68 = 2012 (5) Mh.L.J. 367) has held that the Caste Scrutiny Committee was not justified in rejecting the caste claim of a person on the ground that the competent Authority, which has issued the caste certificate, has no territorial jurisdiction to issue such certificate. 4. In that view of the matter, the petition is required to be allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (i) and (ii) of ...
Bramhanand M. Desai Vs. Chief Electrical Engineer, Government of Goa, ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-11-2012
Oral Judgment:- (S.J. Vazifdar, J.) 1. Respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are the State of Goa, Goa Public Service Commission and one U.L. Salunke, Executive Engineer (Civil), Electricity Department respectively. The petitioner has sought a writ to quash the impugned order dated 11th February, 2005, by which respondent No.4 was promoted to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil) Electricity Department. The petitioner has also sought a writ directing respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 to hold a fresh DPC and consider the petitioner for promotion to the said post in accordance with law with effect from 11th February, 2005. 2. It is not necessary to consider all the contentions raised by the petitioner. This petition can be disposed of on one ground alone. It is agreed that the said post is a promotional post; that prior to the appointment of respondent No.4 to the said post, the petitioner and respondent No.4 were Assistant Engineers and that the petitioner and respondent No.4 were entitled to be conside...
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 mother is not ...
Mrs. NatalIn Araujo Fernandes, Alias NatalIn Fernandes (Since Deceased ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-11-2012
Oral Judgment: Heard Shri A. D. Bhobe, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners and Shri J. P. Mulgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent no.1. 2. Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent no.1 waives service. 3. The above Petition challenge the Order passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, at Mapusa, dated 12.09.2012, whereby an application filed by the Petitioners under Order 7 Rule 14 of the Civil Procedure Code to rely upon some additional documents, came to be rejected. 4. Shri Bhobe, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, has assailed the impugned Order essentially on the ground that the documents which are sought to be produced are public documents and, according to him, the learned Judge was not justified to come to the conclusion that such documents could be manufactured. Learned Counsel further pointed out that the documents which are sought to be produced are material to consider...
Mrs. Rosy Fernandes Vs. State of Goa, Through the Chief Secretary of T ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-11-2012
S.J. Vazifdar, J. Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard finally. 2. Mr. P. Dangui, the learned Additional Government Advocate waives service on behalf of the respondents. 3. Respondent nos. 2 and 3 are the Department of Tourism, Government of Goa and Village Panchayat of Calangute. 4. The petition is filed purportedly as a public interest litigation. The main grievance however relates to the petitioner's personal interest. It is therefore strictly not a public interest litigation. 5. The petitioner contends that the clauses 2, 20, 25, 26 and 32 of the terms and conditions for the grant of permission for erection of temporary shacks/deck-beds/ umbrellas on the identified beaches of Goa for the tourist season of 2012-2013 (October, 2012 to 31st May, 2013) are unconstitutional. The petitioner also seeks an order directing respondent no.1 to implement her suggestions stated in the writ petition. 6. The petitioner has generally alleged that the terms and conditions are likely only to ...
Ramrao S/O Jaimal Bacchav and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra Through ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-11-2012
Oral Judgment: (R.M. Borde, J.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties. 2. The petitioners are primary teachers working in Ashram School having classes from I to VII standards. Petitioners were selected and appointed as Assistant teachers since they possess B.A. B.P.Ed. qualification. Petitioner no.1 came to be appointed with effect from 03.06.1993, whereas, petitioner no.2 came to be appointed with effect from 01.06.1999 and petitioner no.3 came to be appointed with effect from 01.08.1995 in the Primary Ashram School, Mandve Digar, Post Garkheda, Tq.Bhusawal, District Jalgaon. The appointments of the petitioners have been approved by the District Social Welfare Officer, Jalgaon. It is contended by the petitioners that initially they were paid pay scale prescribed for trained Graduate teacher, however, subsequently they have been treated as untrained teachers since they do not possess D.Ed. qualification 3. According ...
Tulshiram S/O Jairam Lahure and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-11-2012
1. The appeal is filed against the judgment and order of Sessions Case No. 158/1996 which was pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad. The appellants were charged for the offences punishable under section 147, 148, 307 of the Indian Penal Code. They are convicted of the offences punishable under section 147, 148 and 324 red with sec. 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sides are heard. This Court has perused original record. 2. In short, the facts leading to the institution of the appeal can be stated as follows. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 are real brothers of accused No.1. Other accused are also relatives of accused No.1. Accused No.5 died during pendency of the case. Agricultural land of accused No.1 Tulshiram is situated in village Bolegaon Tq. Gangapur. Between lands of Tulshiram and of complainant Bankat there is bandh which is also Shiv of two villages viz. Bolegaon and Balapur. Land of Bankat is situated within limits of village Balapur. Though accused Nos. 2 ...
Ameet Arjundas Israni and Another Vs. M/S. Bhumiraj Constructions off. ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-11-2012
Dhanraj Khamatkar, Member [1] This is a consumer complaint filed by the Complainants on 2/3/2006 against the Opponent alleging deficiency in service. [2] Facts leading to this complaint can be summarized as under:- The Complainants have booked a flat bearing No.2001 admeasuring 1249 sq. ft. in A Wing in the project called Hermitage to be constructed by the Opponents in Sanpada, Navi Mumbai. At the time of booking, the Complainants paid an amount of Rs. 21,000/- on 17/2/2005. Consideration for the said flat was agreed at Rs. 34,65,000/-. The Opponents had issued a provisional allotment letter in respect of the flat on 11/4/2005. Thereafter, the Complainants made a payment of Rs. 1,79,000/- towards stamp-duty, registration charges and an agreement was registered with the office of Sub-Registrar on 4/8/2005. The Complainants approached a bank for borrowing a housing loan. The Complainants made following payments, the particulars of which are as under:- DatePayments (Rs.) 17.02.200521,000....
- ‹ Prev
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- Next ›
- Last »