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.
Rafiq Khalil Chand Gavandi and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
Oral Judgment: This appeal is directed against the conviction of the appellants by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli, for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentence of simple imprisonment for one month each with fine of Rs.1,000/- each or in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 15 days and further sentence of simple imprisonment for three months each with fine of Rs.1,000/- each or in default simple imprisonment for 15 days, respectively, on the two counts, upon conclusion of Sessions trial No.30 of 1994, before him. 2. Facts which are material for deciding this appeal are as under:- The victim married to appellant No.1 Rafiq on 13th August, 1992. She resided with the appellants' family at Kupwad, District Sangli. She herself was educated upto B.Com. and could write English well. She gave birth to a son in April, 1993 and had gone back to the appellant's house. She committed suicide by hanging herself on the night of 21st...
Smt. Rekha Wd/O Bhagwatraoji Pusdekar and Others Vs. Malyadri Narasimh ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
Oral Judgment: This appeal arises from the judgment and award dated 4.8.2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Wardha, in M.A.C.P. No.35/2005, whereby the appellants herein were awarded compensation of Rs.7,64,852/- on account of death of one Bhagwatrao which occurred on 14.2.2004, in a motor-vehicular accident involving motorcycle and truck. 2. On 14.2.2004, the deceased with one Gajanan on pillion were riding motorcycle on Nagpur - Hinganghat road. The truck coming from opposite direction dashed against the motorcycle. The truck also turned turtle. In that Bhagwatrao received injuries and succumbed to them on the spot. He left behind him, widow, unmarried daughter aged 21 years, son aged 19 years undergoing education and one minor daughter. They all lodged claim for award of compensation of Rs.20 lakh. Matter proceeded exparte against the owner of the truck. Respondent no.2 and 3 i.e. driver and insurer of the offending vehicle resisted the application mainly on the groun...
PravIn Sheshrao Bhalerao Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
Oral Judgment: Heard. 2. ADMIT. 3. Heard finally by consent. 4. The applicant was accused of offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. He was granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge with certain conditions. One of the conditions was that he should not enter village Kalambeshwar. 5. It is alleged by respondent No.2 Ku. Mangal Tajne, who was victim of the offence, that the applicant on 12th April, 2012 entered her house and outraged her modesty. Offences punishable under Sections 354, 294 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code were registered vide Crime No.47 of 2012 on the complaint made by respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 moved the learned Additional Sessions Judge for cancellation of bail on the ground that the applicant had committed breach of conditions. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, by his impugned order dated 29th May, 2012, accepted the contention of respondent No.2 and cancelled the bail and directed the applicant to surrender before the con...
Ravindra S/O Wamanrao Patne Vs. Sau. Shobha Krushnakumar Patil
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
Oral Judgment: Heard learned Counsel Mr. P.A. Rajurkar for the applicant. 2. Admit. Heard finally at the stage of admission. 3. The non-applicant has not appeared though she has been served. The applicant, in fact, was ready to settle the dispute amicably. This was indicated by the applicant on earlier date also. Therefore, this Court, by order dated 18th April, 2012, had issued fresh notice to the non-applicant and it was directed that the non-applicant should be intimated that the applicant is ready and willing to settle the dispute amicably. However, the non-applicant had not responded to the said notice. Therefore, this Court on 10th September, 2012 had directed that fresh notice shall be dispensed with as the non-applicant had already been served. 4. The applicant has been convicted by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chandur Railway for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The cheque amount was Rs.40,000/-. The learned Magistrate...
Gangadhar Vithobaji Kayande Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
Oral Judgment: (A.H. Joshi, J.) Heard. 2. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. 3. The petitioner had filed a case in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class for direction to register the offence. The direction under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure was issued. Based thereon Crime No.4 of 2007 for offence punishable under sections 120, 405, 406, 468, 469, 201, 474 read with sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code at Kadim Jalna Police Station was registered. 4. The text of first information report runs at considerable length. Substance of the first information report is narrated in the body of present writ petition in para no.2 which reads as follows:- "2. The accused no.1 is husband of sister of complainant. Petitioner no.1 was resident of Nashik and therefore, he entered into sale transaction. The transaction was entered in order to assist sister and her husband. The complainant has given money for the said transaction, however, in connivance with each ot...
Shaikh Harun Shaikh Chhotu Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
Oral Judgment: This appeal is directed against the appellant's conviction by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik for offences punishable under Sections 326 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "IPC") and sentences of rigorous imprisonment for four years with fine of Rs.2,000/- and one year with fine of Rs.500/- imposed upon the appellant upon conclusion of Sessions Case No.234 of 1992 before him. 2. The facts which are material for deciding this appeal are as under:- The appellant had illicit intimacy with the victim who had been divorced by her husband. The appellant got married thereafter and, therefore, the victim told the appellant to severe his relations with the victim. The appellant, however, insisted on continuance of those relations. This happened at Chalisgaon. In the month of May, 1992 the victim came to the house of her sister Chhaya at Nashik Road. On 4-5-1992, in the afternoon, the appellant also came to the house of Chhaya and met the victim. He then le...
Lkp Finance Ltd. Vs. International Asset Reconstruction Co. Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
D. D. Sinha, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. 2. Writ petition is directed against the order dated 15.5.2012 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal II, Mumbai whereby the Securitization Application No. 18 of 2012 filed by the petitioner came to be dismissed as well as judgment and order dated 7.8.2012 passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai, whereby Appeal No.114 of 2012 filed by the petitioner against the order of the DRT came to be dismissed. 3. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner was having a possessory lien over the premises in question i.e. Office premises No. 106, 1st floor, 'A' Wing, 212, Dalamal Towers, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400021 and was in possession of the premises therefore the respondent could not have evicted the petitioner from the subject premises by invoking the provisions of The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act...
Ashok Mahadevan and Others Vs. Divisional Joint Registrar and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
Oral Judgment: (Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) Rule; with the consent of Counsel for the parties returnable forthwith. With the consent of Counsel and at their request the Petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal. 2. In these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution, the Petitioners have sought a writ of prohibition against the First Respondent, the Divisional Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, from proceeding with an application dated 15 March 2012 filed by Respondents 2, 3 and 6, seeking sanction to prosecute the Petitioners under Section 148 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. Section 148 specifically provides that no prosecution under the Act shall be lodged, except with the previous sanction of the Registrar. The application which has been filed by Respondents 2, 3 and 6 is pending before the First Respondent. 3. The application for sanction proceeds on the basis that the Pilot Bunder Co-operative Housing Society was allotted a plot of fores...
Sonaji S/O Udaibhan Ambhore and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
Oral Judgment: (P.V. Hardas, J.) The appellant no.1-Original Accused No.1, who stands convicted and sentenced to:- (a) Imprisonment for Life and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-, in default, further Rigorous Imprisonment for six months (Section 302 of Indian Penal Code), (b) Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of which, to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for six months (Section 394 of Indian Penal Code), and (c) Rigorous Imprisonment for six months (Section 414 of Indian Penal Code), while the Appellant No.2-Original Accused No.2, who stands convicted for an offence punishable under Section 414 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for six months, by the Principal Sessions Judge, Buldana, vide Judgment dated 9th December, 2011 in Sessions Case No.90 of 2007, by this appeal, question the correctness of their conviction and sentences. Facts, in brief, as are necessary for the decision of this appeal, may be stated thus:...
Narayandas Gulabchand Agrawal Vs. Shikshak Shikshan Sanstha and Anothe ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
Oral Judgment: RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. The Writ Petition is heard finally at the stage of admission as a notice for final disposal was issued to the respondents and the respondents are duly served with the notice. 2. The petitioner is the original plaintiff. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the building bearing Municipal House Nos.633 and 634 situated in Kirana Oli, Kamptee. The suit house was let out to the respondent no.1 and was used by the respondent no.1 for the purpose of running a School. It was the case of the petitioner-plaintiff that though the office bearers of the respondent no.1 had assured the petitioner that they would vacate the school premises after a building of their own was constructed, the respondent no.1 failed to vacate the premises. It was pleaded that the Government had allotted about 8000 sq.ft. of land in Kamptee to the respondent no.1 and the respondent No.1 had constructed a building thereon for running the classes in the same. It was ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »