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.
Rahul Hanmant Kamble Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
Oral Judgment: (Smt. V.K. Tahilramani, J.) 1. Through this Appeal, the Appellant-Original Accused has challenged the Judgment and Order dated 24.07.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kohapur in Sessions Case No. 24 of 2008. By the said Judgment and Order, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the Appellant under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (in short, 'IPC') and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four months. 2. The prosecution case, briefly stated, is as follows:- i. The Appellant i.e the original accused Rahul was married to Jaya who was the sister of Arjun Gaikwad i.e the deceased. Arjun Gaikwad was residing in Sadar Bazaar, Vichare Mal at Kolhapur along with his wife, parents and other family members. Accused along with his wife Jaya was residing in Salokhe Park near the house of Dilawar Mulla at Kolhapur. The accused was alleging that his wife Jaya had illicit relati...
Vishnu S/O. Satva Bade and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, both the sides are heard for final disposal. 2. This Court has perused copies of charge-sheet and the papers of investigation and also copies of other documents with regard to the dispute, which was going on between original complainant and some of the petitioners. The proceeding is filed for quashing of the criminal case bearing R.C.C.No.95/2011, which is pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Wadvani, District Beed. The chargesheet is filed against the petitioners for offences punishable under sections 420, 471, 499, 500, 504, 506, 191, 192, 193 and 34 of Indian Penal Code. The copy of order made by J.M.F.C. on Exh. 83 is produced and it shows that application filed by accused for discharge is partly allowed and the petitioners are already discharged of the offences punishable under sections 191, 192, 193 of I.P.C. Thus, present proceeding is in respect of remaining offences. 3. A private complaint was filed by resp...
Bhanudas Radhakisan Bhise Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
Oral Judgment: (Smt. V.K. Tahilramani, J.) 1. Through this Appeal, the Appellant-Original Accused has challenged the Judgment and Order dated 23.09.2008 passed by the 3rd Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Sewree, Mumbai in Sessions Case No. 684 of 2007. By the said Judgment and Order, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the Appellant under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (in short, 'IPC') and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. 2. The prosecution case, briefly stated, is as follows:- i. The Appellant-Original Accused was the husband of Dwarka, the deceased. Their marriage had taken place about 15 years prior to the incident. They had three daughters. Geeta is the eldest daughter who was 11 years of age at the time of the incident. They were residing at Room No. 504, in front of Nagsen Buddhavihar, just opposite to the backside gate of B.S.E.S., Panchsheel Nagar No. 1, C...
Deutsche Bank Ag Vs. Pearl Engineering Polymers Limited
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
The Petitioner, a Foreign Company, constituted under the laws of Germany, has invoked Section 433(e) and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, (for short the Act). 2 The Petitioner has been authorized to carry on banking business in India. The basic facts about the Petitioner-Bank and the reasons for filing of the present Company Petition for winding-up against M/s. Pearl Engineering Polymers Limited, i.e. the Respondent-Company, are as under: The present Petitioner is a body corporate and is also authorized to carry on banking business in India and constituted under the Laws of Germany. One Asian Finance and Investment Corporation Ltd. (AFIC) being an institution as per the laws of Republic of Singapore engaged in investment for industrial activities in the Asian Region. Under the terms of an agreement relating to sale of assets and subscription for shares dated 28th February, 2005 (Purchase Agreement), ACTIS AFIC Holdings Ltd. agreed to purchase certain financial and investments (including...
Shantilal J. Shah and Others Vs. Jitendra Sanghavi and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
Oral Order: The above suit is filed by the Plaintiffs for, a declaration that the Development Agreement dated 25th September 2007 (Exhibit-A to the Plaint) ("the said Agreement") entered into between the Plaintiffs and Defendant Nos.1 to 3 and the Irrevocable Power of Attorney dated 25th October 2007 (Exhibit-B to the Plaint) ("the said POA") are valid, subsisting and binding on the Plaintiffs and Defendant Nos.1 to 3 and also a declaration that the purported letter of termination dated 4th October 2011 (Exhibit-E to the Plaint), terminating the said Agreement and the said POA, is illegal, wrongful, null and void, for possession from Defendant Nos.1 to 4 of the immovable property situated at Plot No.270, Deodhar Road, Matunga, bearing New Survey No.885 and Cadastral Survey No.205/10 of Dadar-Matunga Division, Mumbai- 400019 along with the building known as "Padmavati Sadan" thereon consisting of ground plus 3 floors comprising of 19 tenements ("the suit property") and ordering and dire...
Dipak @ Sk. Salim Sk. Badru Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
Oral Judgment: (A.B. Chaudhari, J.) Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 28.3.2008 in Session Trial No.54/2006 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Akola, convicting the appellant/original accused for the offence punishable under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) in default rigorous imprisonment for one month and further convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only), in default simple imprisonment for fifteen days, the appellant above named has preferred this appeal. 2. In support of the appeal, the learned Counsel for the appellant made the following submissions. (A) That admittedly there is no direct evidence in the instant case in respect of the co...
State of Maharashtra, Through Its Secretary, Ministry of Irrigation an ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
Oral Judgment: This appeal arises from the judgment and award dated 21.8.1995 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Wardha in Motor Accident Case No.48/1988, whereby the learned Tribunal awarded the total amount of compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the respondent no.1 on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor vehicular accident occurred on 9.6.1988 on Ashti - Drugwada road district Wardha, involving motor cycle bearing registration no. MGU-6473 and jeep bearing registration no. MHV-5743. 2] It was the case of the respondent that on 9.6.1988 he was proceeding from village Ashti to village Sahur by riding pillion on the motorcycle driven by respondent no.3. When their motor cycle was negotiating through the forest area, the truck driven by the appellant no.2 dashed against the motor cycle. He and respondent no.3 sustained injuries. He was required to undergo prolonged treatment and therefore under all the heads he claimed compensation of Rs.50,000/-. 3] The appellant ...
Sadashiv s/o. Ganpatrao Mahajan and Others Vs. the Hon'ble Minister fo ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
Oral Judgment: (B.R. Gavai, J.) 1. Admit. By consent, taken up for final hearing. 2. The appellants/Original Writ Petitioners have approached this Court by way of present intra Court appeals being aggrieved by the part of the findings, as recorded by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Judgment and Order, dated 16.8.2012 passed in Writ Petition No.956 of 2011 along with companion petitions. 2. The facts, in brief, giving rise to the present appeals, are as under: Respondent no.2/Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Amravati, on the basis of the report of NABARD and the subsequent report by the District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Yavatmal, had issued show cause notices on 26.2.2012 to fourteen Directors of respondent no.3/Yavatmal District Central Cooperative Bank, who are respondent no.4 respectively in each of these appeals, calling upon then to show cause as to why they should not be held to be 'disqualified' under the provisions of Section 73-EA o...
Dr. Vinod Shankarlal Sharma and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-07-2012
Oral Judgment: (Per Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) These proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution have been instituted by doctors, who have either completed or are students of Super-speciality courses in Medicine. On the non-surgical discipline, the super-speciality course is D.M. while on the surgical side, the super-speciality course is M.Ch. Of the 62 doctors in the first Petition and 69 doctors in the second, the distribution is in three batches. The first batch consists of doctors, who had obtained admission to the D.M. or M.Ch. in 2009 and who have passed their course in September 2012. The second batch is of doctors, who were admitted in 2010 and who would be completing their course of studies in 2013, while the third batch consists of doctors, who were admitted in 2011 and who would be completing their studies in 2014. All the doctors before the Court have completed their basic M.B.B.S. Degree as well as a post-graduation in the relevant branches of medicine in which they h...
Amol Shankar Nagare and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-06-2012
A.S. Oka, J. Rule. The learned APP waives service for the 1st respondent. The learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent waives service. Taken up forthwith for hearing. 2. The prayer is for quashing the criminal proceeding initiated on the basis of the first information report registered at the instance of the 2nd respondent alleging commission of offences under Sections 498A, 406 read with Section 34 of IPC. 3. The learned Counsel appearing for the applicants has invited our attention to the consent terms filed in the pending matrimonial petition before the Family Court. The consent terms record a complete settlement of the matrimonial dispute between the 1st applicant and the 2nd respondent-wife and the amount as provided in the consent terms has been deposited with the Family Court. In the consent terms, it is agreed that after deposit of Rs.1,60,000/-, the 2nd respondent will co-operate with the applicant for getting the criminal proceedings quashed. The learned Counsel appearing for t...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »