Mumbai Court November 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.
Harishchandra P. Gaunkar Vs. Anant S. Natalkar and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Nov-02-2012
Oral Judgment : Heard Shri M.B. Da Costa, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant and Shri S.R. Rivonkar, learned Counsel appearing for respondents no.2 to 5. 2. The above appeals challenge the common judgment passed by the learned Reference Court dated 21/03/2002 passed in Land Acquisition Case Nos.31/1991, 32/1991 and 33/1991. The parties shall be referred to in the manner they so appear in the cause title of the impugned judgment. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the land was acquired for the purpose of road widening from Bethora to Nirankar in Ponda Taluka, having an area of 875 square metres from the property under survey no.234 (part), an area of 480 square metres from the property surveyed under no.235(part) and an area of 235 square metres from the property surveyed under no.240 (part) of the village of Ponda. In view of the dispute between the parties a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (herein after referred to as 'the said Act'...
State of Goa, Through the Deputy Collector (L.A.) and Others Vs. Gil F ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Nov-02-2012
Oral Judgment: Heard Shri M. Salkar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the appellants and Shri C.A. Ferreira, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. The above appeal challenges the judgment and award dated 2/07/2001 passed by the learned District Judge, South Goa at Margao in Land Acquisition Case No.227/1993 whereby a reference preferred by the respondent under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (herein after referred to as 'the said Act') was partly allowed and the appellants were directed to pay compensation to the respondent for the land acquired at the rate of Rs.20/- per square metre besides a sum of Rs.10/- per square metre towards the severance charges in respect of an area of 35 square metres of land. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that pursuant to the notification under Section 4 of the said Act, the appellants acquired land belonging to the respondents admeasuring an area of 210 square metres from survey no.109/3; 65 square metres from sur...
Arif Ali S/O Yusuf Ali Sayyed Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Nov-02-2012
Oral Judgment: 1] Heard respective learned counsel for the parties. 2] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself. 3] The petitioner herein has preferred the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and also under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying that the order passed by the learned Special Judge, Dhule below application Exh. 54 in Special Case No. 19 of 2011 on 12.7.2012 be quashed and set aside. 4] The factual matrix giving rise to the present petition is as follows:- The petitioner is the original accused in Special Case No. 19 of 2011 and is being tried therein for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, by the learned Special Judge, Dhule. The petitioner is a police constable and it is alleged that the petitioner demanded and accepted an amount of Rs. 70,000/- from o...
Balhim S/O. Ramrao Chitte and Another Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Nov-01-2012
1. The proceeding is filed against the judgment and order of Criminal Appeal No. 5/1996, which was pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Osmanabad. In the appeal, the judgment and order of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Omerga, delivered in R.C.C. No. 66/1989 was challenged. The J.M.F.C. has sentenced the petitioners for offences punishable under section 326, 324 and 34 of Indian Penal Code and this decision is confirmed by the Sessions Court. Both the sides are heard. The advocate of the original complainant was allowed to assist APP. This Court has perused the original record. 2. In short, the facts leading to the institution of the proceeding can be stated as follows:- There is a dispute between the side of complainant and the side of accused over some portion of agricultural lands bearing Survey Nos. 272 and 273 situated at Jakekurwadi. The incident took place on the night between 27.12.1988 and 28.12.1988. It is the case of complainant Waman that on that night, he ...
Hindustan Dorr Oliver Ltd. Vs. Jet Airways (India) Limited
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-01-2012
Oral Judgment : 1 Heard finally by consent. 2 The Petitioner, the owner of the commercial premises which were let out to the Respondent Company, the Licensor, has invoked Sections 433(e) and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short, the Companies Act) basically on the ground that the Respondent Company not cleared the service tax liability. 3 We have dealt with the aspect of service tax on renting in the case of Retailers Association of India (RAI) vs. Union of India and Ors., (2011 (5) Mh.L.J. 660)where a Notification was issued on 22nd May, 2007 which was followed by a circular dated 4th January, 2008 of the Ministry of Finance in the Union Government. In para 3 it is observed thus: “3. Following the decision of the Delhi High Court, the Finance Act, 2010 substituted the provisions of sub-clause (zzzz) with effect from 1 June, 2007. As amended, the provision now stipulates that the expression taxable service means any service provided or to be provided: 'To any person, by any ...
Hindustan Dorr Oliver Ltd. Vs. Jet Airways (India) Limited
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-01-2012
Oral Judgment : 1 Heard finally by consent. 2 The Petitioner, the owner of the commercial premises which were let out to the Respondent Company, the Licensor, has invoked Sections 433(e) and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short, the Companies Act) basically on the ground that the Respondent Company not cleared the service tax liability. 3 We have dealt with the aspect of service tax on renting in the case of Retailers Association of India (RAI) vs. Union of India and Ors., (2011 (5) Mh.L.J. 660)where a Notification was issued on 22nd May, 2007 which was followed by a circular dated 4th January, 2008 of the Ministry of Finance in the Union Government. In para 3 it is observed thus: 3. Following the decision of the Delhi High Court, the Finance Act, 2010 substituted the provisions of sub-clause (zzzz) with effect from 1 June, 2007. As amended, the provision now stipulates that the expression taxable service means any service provided or to be provided: 'To any person, by any other p...
Praveen Marotrao Dhandre and Others Vs. Smt. Manisha Praveen Dhandre a ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Nov-01-2012
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 2. By consent both the sides are heard for final disposal. 3. Learned A.P.P. is also heard. 4. Present proceeding is filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the charge sheet of R.C.C. No.376/2005 and the proceeding of private complaint bearing R.C.C. No.107/2003. In the first case, respondent No.2, the wife was the complainant and on the report given by her, investigation was made and charge sheet was filed. In that case, the allegations are made that some household articles and ornaments etc. remained with the husband and he was not returning those articles. The charge sheet is filed for offence punishable under section 406, 420 and section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. In the private complaint viz. R.C.C. No.107/2003, there are allegations that ill-treatment was given. Threats were given and assault was made and it is for offence punishable u/s 498-A, 504, 325, 504 of the Indian Penal Code. 5. It was submitted by ...
Julie Jayesh Shah, Hindu Vs. Jayesh Trilok Kumar Shah, Hindu
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-01-2012
Oral Judgment: (V.M. Kanade, J.) 1. Appellant is the wife and Respondent is the husband. For the sake of convenience, parties shall hereinafter be referred to as wife and husband. 2. The wife has filed this appeal under section 19 of the Family Court Act being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Mumbai dated 30/08/2012 whereby her Misc. Application No.185 of 2012 seeking transfer of the Petition from Court Room No.5 to any other Court was dismissed. 3. Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under:- 4. Appellant/wife and Respondent/husband got married on 16/11/1997. One son Parshva was born to them on 7/7/2000. Differences and disputes arose between husband and wife and, accordingly, negotiations were going on in the month of April, 2012 and May 2012. Draft consent terms were exchanged between the parties. The husband, however, filed Custody Petition bearing No. D-35/2012 in the Family Court and an ex parte order of injunction w...
Balhim S/O. Ramrao Chitte and Another Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Nov-01-2012
1. The proceeding is filed against the judgment and order of Criminal Appeal No. 5/1996, which was pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Osmanabad. In the appeal, the judgment and order of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Omerga, delivered in R.C.C. No. 66/1989 was challenged. The J.M.F.C. has sentenced the petitioners for offences punishable under section 326, 324 and 34 of Indian Penal Code and this decision is confirmed by the Sessions Court. Both the sides are heard. The advocate of the original complainant was allowed to assist APP. This Court has perused the original record. 2. In short, the facts leading to the institution of the proceeding can be stated as follows:- There is a dispute between the side of complainant and the side of accused over some portion of agricultural lands bearing Survey Nos. 272 and 273 situated at Jakekurwadi. The incident took place on the night between 27.12.1988 and 28.12.1988. It is the case of complainant Waman that on that night, he ...
Kamlesh S/O Prtapbhal Thakkar and Another Vs. the State of Maharashtra ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Nov-01-2012
1. The proceeding is filed to challenge the order made by Additional Sessions Judge, Shrirampur District Ahmednagar on Exh. 23 in Sessions Case No. 03/2009. The application was filed by applicants for discharge. The charge sheet is filed against them for offences punishable under section 306, 506 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and for offences punishable under section 32, 33(a), (b) of Bombay Money Lending Act. 2. The application is rejected by Sessions Court. Both the sides are heard. Copies of papers of investigation were made available to this Court. 3. Crime is registered on the basis of the report given by one Smt. Arti. Deceased Anil was her husband. He committed suicide by hanging himself in his house on 03/08/2009. It is the case of his widow that there was some money lending transaction between the applicants and the deceased and the applicants were harassing the deceased due to the transaction. It is her case that some document in respect of the land of the dec...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »