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.
M/S. Abg Ports Limited Vs. M/S.Psa International Pte Limited and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
D.D. Sinha, J. The appellant has filed the suit, inter alia, seeking a declaration that the Joint Bid Agreement (JBA), the Counter Guarantee, and its invocation by the respondent no.1 vide its letter dated 21.9.2012 is illegal, wrongful and vitiated by fraud and is, therefore, null and void, non-est and of no effect whatsoever. The appellant has taken out a Notice of Motion for an order that pending the hearing and final disposal of the suit, direct and restrain by way of a temporary injunction the respondent no.3 from acting by themselves or through their servants, agents, representatives and/or all other persons claiming by, through or under them paying to the respondent no.1 or to anyone else any amount purportedly under the Counter Guarantee. Similar temporary injunction is sought against the respondent no.1 from receiving from the respondent no.3 any amount purportedly under the Counter Guarantee. The appellant has also claimed a temporary injunction restraining the respondent nos...
Krishnnanad S/O. S. Subbarao Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
Oral Judgment: Heard. 2. ADMIT. 3. Heard finally by consent. 4. The applicant has been convicted by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He has filed an appeal before the Sessions Court. The appeal has been admitted. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has directed the applicant to deposit 25% of the compensation awarded to the original complainant to be paid by the applicant. It is submitted that 25% of the compensation amount has been deposited by the applicant. The applicant has been ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one solvent surety. Grievance of the applicant is that the surety has not been accepted by the Appellate Court. He, therefore, applied for cash security. The learned Additional Sessions Judge/ Appellate Court, instead of passing any order on the prayer of the applicant for allowing him to furnish cash security instead of solvent surety, has directed the applican...
Dattatraya S/O Pandhrinath Kamble and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
Oral Judgment: (A.H. Joshi, J.) Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 3. For convenience, the petitioner No. 1 and Respondent no. 2 are referred to with their name. 4. Dattatraya Kamble (petitioner No. 1) was promoted by the management as Head Master by order dated 7.1.2009. The Education Officer approved the said promotion by order dated 1.4.2009. 5. Dattatraya Jadhav (Respondent No. 2) had challenged the said promotion by filing appeal, being appeal No. 12 of 2009 before the School Tribunal, Aurangabad. In the said appeal, he had raised against Dattatraya Kamble, the pleas of fraud, fabrication of documents etc. which he has again raised in the F.I.R. subject matter of challenge in present writ petition. 6. The contentions raised by Dattatraya Jadhav (Respondent No. 2 herein) as appellant before the School Tribunal were that :- (a) Dattatraya Jadhav (Respondent No. 2) the Appellant before Tribunal had entered the employmen...
Surekha Krishnaji Kulkarni and Others Vs. Lifeline Hospital Ad Medical ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
S.B. Mhase, President 1. Heard Mr.K.G. Kulkarni, Advocate for the applicant/appellant. 2. This appeal is directed as against the order passed by District Forum, Nashik in consumer complaint No.114/2005 decided on 24/04/2012. By the said order, consumer complaint was dismissed. On the same day i.e. 24/04/2012 true copy of the said order was delivered to the appellant/org. complainant. However, appeal has been filed on 29/10/2012 and thus, there is delay in filing appeal. Therefore, delay condonation application has been filed to condone the delay of 35 days. However, we find that actual delay is more than 35 days and it has not been properly calculated by Advocate for the applicant/appellant who himself is brother of the deceased and brother-in-law of the applicant/appellant. 3. The ground for condonation of delay is that on 26/04/2012 Advocate for the applicant has preferred two applications for getting certified copies of the documents. It is stated that certified copies of the do...
Jalindar S/O. Kishan Mangrule Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
Revision is admitted. By consent, heard both the sides for final disposal. Seen the original record. 2. Revision is filed against the judgment and order of Criminal Appeal No.4/2009, which was pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Osmanabad. The Additional Sessions Judge has set aside the judgment and order of acquittal delivered in R.C.C. No.399/2005 by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Osmanabad. The C.J.M. had acquitted the petitioner of the offences punishable under section 9, 39, 44, 49 r/w. 51 of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972. 3. It is the case of Forest Department that accused Jalindar Mangrule had created barbed wire fencing around his agricultural land and supply of electricity was given to this barbed wire fencing. One deer accidentally came across this fencing, suffered shock of electricity and died. Accused No.1 Jalindar and Khandu then cut the deer in to pieces for eating its flesh. The Forest Officer learned about the incident and they raided the field of accused N...
Vijay Narayan Bhambure and Another Vs. the Branch Manager Icici Bank L ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
1. This appeal takes an exception to an order dated 05/01/2011 dismissing a consumer complaint bearing No.178/2009, Vijay Narayan Bhambure and Anr. V/s. Branch Manager, ICICI Bank Ltd.; Loan Against Securities Department, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai, by District Forum, Central Mumbai. Feeling aggrieved by the dismissal, original complainant has preferred this appeal. 2. It is the case of complainants-Mr.Vijay Narayan Bhambure and Mrs.Sheela Vijay Bhambure that they had taken services of ICICI Bank Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Bank) for taking loan against shares i.e. loan against securities by opening a current account. Shares accordingly were pledged with the Bank and as agreed between the parties, the complainants could avail the loan limit to the extent of 50% of the value of shares. It is not in dispute that if the limit exceeds, the complainants had to make good by pledging additional shares relevant to the market value of the shares pledged. In case the complainants failed to ...
Kingfisher Airlines Limited Vs. Capt. Prithvi Malhotra Instructor (Emp ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-20-2012
1) The common question of law, that arises for consideration in the above three petitions is, whether a industrial dispute or a dispute relating to enforcement of a right or an obligation created under the Industrial Disputes Act, (the I.D. Act for short) is arbitrable, i.e. capable of being adjudicated by a private forum of an arbitrator. 2). The petitioner in all the petitions is a public limited company and a air transport industry. The respondent in each petition is employed by the petitioner as a Pilot. All the respondents have filed applications under Section 33(C)(2) of the I.D. Act read with Rule 62(2) of the Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules, 1957 in CGIT-cum-Labour Court for recovery of their earned wages. They also seek interest on the earned wages at the rate of 18% p.a. from the date the wages become due and payable under the Payment of Wages Act read with Rules framed thereunder. After entering its appearance in the proceedings, the petitioner filed identical applicatio...
Kalyan Alias Dalya Shiva Shinde Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-20-2012
Oral Judgment: These two appeals by the original accused Nos.1, 2 and 5 in Maharashtra Control of Organised Act, 1999 (Hereinafter referred to as MCOC Act) Special Case Nos.23 of 2007 and 6 of 2008 are directed against their conviction by the learned Special Judge for trial of cases under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Act, 1999 at Bombay, and sentences imposed upon them at the end of the trial. The learned Judge convicted the appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 397, 457 and 506(II) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years with a fine of Rs.5,000/- or in default rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year on the first 2 counts and rigorous imprisonment for seven years with a fine of Rs.1,000/- or in default rigorous imprisonment for two months on the third count. The learned Judge acquitted the appellants of the offences punishable under Section 3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of the MCOC Act, Sent...
Kiran S/O Dinkar Patil and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Nov-20-2012
Oral Judgment: (A.H. Joshi, J.) 1. Five accused were tried in Sessions Case No.139 of 2011. They were charged for commission of offences under section 302 read with sec. 34, 498A read with sec. 34, 323 read with sec.34, 504 read with sec.34 and 506 read with sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Substance of the charge is ill-treating, intimidating, causing hurt, ill-treatment for dowry related demand and murder of Dipali wife of accused no.1 by pouring kerosene on her person and setting her to fire on 3.8.2011 at about 11.30 a.m. 3. Three out of five accused were convicted by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule in Sessions Case No.139 of 2011 for offences under section 498A and 302 read with sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Each of them was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer further R.I. for one month for offence punishable under sec. 498A read with sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and imprisonment for life...
The Divisional Controller Vs. Shamrao S/O Sitaram Irpati and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-20-2012
Oral Judgment: This appeal arises from the judgment and award dated 27.10.2005 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur in Claim Petition No.777/1997 whereby the claimants / respondents herein were awarded compensation of Rs.6,38,000/- on account of death of Rashi aged about 24 years, who had recently passed M.B.B.S. Examination and was undergoing the internship. 2] Accident occurred on 21.7.2000 on Ghat Road, Nagpur. Rashi was riding pillion on the motorcycle which was being driven by her brother. State Transport Bus bearing Registration No. MH-31-8211 coming from opposite direction dashed against the motorcycle. As a result of this, Rashi sustained injuries and died on the spot. The driver of the bus was charge-sheeted. Claimants are her parents and elder brother. 3] The appellant original respondent resisted the petition mainly on the ground that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the bus. The learned Tribunal after assessing the evidence placed on rec...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »