Mumbai Court December 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.
Allan Victor De Souza Vs. Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societie ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Dec-10-2012
Oral Judgment: Heard Shri V. A. Lawande, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners and Shri J. P. Mulgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4. 2. The above Petition seeks to quash the Judgment and Order dated 24.06.2004 passed by the Respondent no.1 as well as the subsequent Order dated 02.12.2004, whereby, inter alia, part of the salary of the Petitioners was ordered to be deducted for the recovery of the amount due to the Respondent no.2. 3. Shri Lawande, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, has assailed the initial Judgment dated 24.06.2004, on the ground that the Registrar has passed the impugned Judgment on the assumption that he is a nominee, when the law provides that such proceedings are to be disposed of upon appointment by a Notification by the Central Registrar to perform the functions of an Arbitrator. Learned Counsel further pointed out that no such Notification has been produced by the Respondents and, as such, the whole exercise...
Dr. SachIn S/O Manikrao Deshmukh Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Dec-10-2012
Oral Judgment: Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of parties taken up for final hearing. 2. The petitioner's sonography clinic is registered under the provisions of the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act 1994 (hereinafter referred as to the "P.C.P.N.D.T. Act" for the sake of brevity). It appears that, on 05th June, 2012 the Appropriate Authority visited the sonography centre of the petitioner and on the very same day suspended the registration of the said sonography centre. It appears that, the petitioner gave his detailed reply on 08th June, 2012. On 19th June, 2012 a panchanama was conducted. In the panchanama it is stated that reply given by the petitioner is not found to be satisfactory and the Medical Officer sealed the sonography machine. Thereafter on 19.06.2012 the Health Officer again suspended the registration. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Maharashtra State Appropriate Authority. The said appe...
The Managing Director, Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt Ltd Vs. Vijay Jay K K ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-2012
S.R. Khanzode, Judicial Member: 1. Admit and heard forthwith with the consent of the parties. 2. This appeal takes an exception to an order dated 13/06/2011 passed in consumer complaint no.32/2008 Jai K. Kothari and another v/s. Managing Director-Nahalchand Laluchand Pvt.Ltd., passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mumbai Suburban, Mumbai (the Forum in short). 3. It is the case of alleged deficiency in service on the part of builder/developer/ Nahalchand Laluchand Pvt.Ltd. for not handing over possession of flat of the complainant. Forum partly allowed the complaint and for the reasons mentioned, instead of delivering possession of flat directed to refund consideration paid of Rs. 65,000/- plus expenses incurred towards the stamp duty and registration of the agreement and directed to pay total compensation of Rs. 1,43,000/- along with interest @ 18% p.a. w.e.f. 19/06/2006 and also awarded costs of Rs. 5,000/-. Feeling aggrieved thereby builder/developer preferred this ap...
Sambhaji Soma Rupnavar Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-2012
Oral Judgment: This appeal is directed against conviction of the appellant by the learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur, for the offences under Sections 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine of Rs. 5,000/- or in default rigorous imprisonment for one year, imposed upon the appellant, on each of the two counts, on conclusion of trial of Sessions Case No.71 of 1995, before him. 2. The facts which are material for deciding this appeal are as under:- The victim was married to the appellant on 16.5.1979. She gave birth to a daughter on 20th May, 1980. A son, who was subsequently born on 1st March, 1982, died on 25th March, 1982 due to alleged neglect by not providing medical treatment on the part of appellant. In March, 1982, the appellant sent the victim to her parents house. He seems to have taken P.W. 1 Keshar as second wife in 1983, and also left Keshar in six months. Thereafter it appears that by mutual agreement ...
The State of Diu Vs. Subhash Ukad Patel
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-2012
Oral Judgment: 1. By the present appeal, the State of Diu has challenged the judgment and order dated 20.01.1997 delivered in R.C.C. No.83 of 1993 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Daman acquitting the respondent accused from the charge of commission of offence under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code. The said prosecution has emerged out of the charge sheet submitted by Daman Police Station as a result of investigation of Crime No.92 of 1993 registered with the said police station upon complaint lodged by PW1 Navin regarding incident of assault which had occurred on 12.06.1993 at 4.00 p.m. at Chheda Falia in the house of PW1 in which the respondent had allegedly assaulted and caused injuries to PW1 by means of knife. After completion of the investigation of the said crime, PW 7 ASI Solanki has charge sheeted the respondent for commission of offence under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. According to the prosecution, on 12.06.1993 at about 16.00 hours when PW1 was in his hous...
Holy-wood Academy and Another Vs. All India Council for Technical Educ ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-2012
Oral Judgment: (Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) 1. This Petition has been listed before the Court together with a batch of Petitions. Submissions on the issue of law have been heard in the lead petition (Writ Petition 10575 of 2012 Sou. Devibai Narayandas Chhabda Rural Education Society v. Shivaji University) in which judgment has been delivered yesterday. In the present case, the First Petitioner applied to the AICTE on 20 January 2012 for extension of approval to certain existing courses and for commencing new undergraduate and postgraduate courses in engineering. The Petition relates to the affiliation sought from the University for commencing Masters in Engineering Degree Courses in the subjects of Mechanical Engineering Design and Electronics and Telecommunications respectively. After applying to the AICTE, the Petitioners submitted a proposal to the Third Respondent, Shivaji University, on 21 January 2012 for the grant of affiliation for starting new undergraduate as well as postgradu...
Ashok Ramnath Acharya Vs. Raj Bhandare and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Dec-07-2012
Oral Judgment: Heard Shri D. Pangam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri A. D. Bhobe, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent no.1. Respondent no.2 though served failed to remain present. 2. The above petition challenges an order dated 08.08.2011 passed by the learned Civil Judge Junior Division, Panaji, under Order XV A of the Civil Procedure Code whereby an application filed by the petitioner to direct the respondent no.1 to deposit the licence fees of Rs.30,000/- came to be rejected. 3. During the course of the hearing of the above petition, Shri Pangam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has pointed out that the learned Judge whilst passing the impugned order at para 7 of the impugned order has non suited the petitioner to direct the respondent no.1 to deposit a sum of Rs.30,000/- on the ground that there was no material on record to substantiate the contention of the petitioner that the licence fees of Rs.30,000/- per month was agreed to be paid by...
Dhaya Gomya Paradhi Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-2012
A.R. Joshi, J. 1. Heard rival submissions on this Criminal Appeal preferred by the appellant/orig.accused challenging the judgment and order of conviction dated 27th April, 2005 passed by the Sessions Judge, RaigadAlibag in Sessions Case No.47 of 2005. By the impugned judgment and order the appellant/accused was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life 2. The case of the prosecution, in nutshell, is as under: Marriage between appellant/accused and his wife victim Nagi (since deceased) took place some time in the year 2001. Appellant/accused was quarreling with the victim his wife and was beating her at times on the ground that she was frequently visiting her parents. In the year 2004, though there was custom that a woman should visit the house of her parents on the occasion of SarvapitraAmavasya, she did not visit and as such her father Balya Pingla had been to the house of appellant/accused. That time, he found tha...
Mahesh Kamat Vs. S. Vallabhdas Vishundas
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Dec-07-2012
Heard Mr. Menezes, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Coutinho, learned Counsel for the respondent. 2. By this appeal, the appellant who is the 2 complainant in Criminal Case No.71/P/1998/D before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Margao takes exception to thejudgment and order of acquittal dated 16/12/2008 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Margao acquitting the respondent/ accused of the offence punishable under Section 500 of I.P.C. 3. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to as per their status before learned Magistrate. 4. The complainant who was employed with Kadamba Transport Corporation as Deputy Finance Controller filed the above criminal case against the accused for having committed offence of defamation punishable under Section 500 of I.P.C. According to the complainant, on 27/03/1996, the accused lodged report with Porvorim Police Station which was registered under Crime No.28/1996 under Sections 419, 420, 468 of I.P.C. against the complainan...
Yeshwant S/O. Vithoba Kamble Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-07-2012
Oral Judgment: The applicant/appellant is convicted of the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of rupees five hundred in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month. The appellant is accused of having committed rape on his own daughter viz. Madhuri Kamble. The appellant was staying with his wife, three daughters and a son at village Kotamba, Tahsil: Seloo, District : Wardha. 2. The victim/ prosecutrix was studying in 10th standard in the year 2009. The appellant had sexual intercourse with her on numerous occasions. The first ever occurrence had taken place in the month of October, 2009 when the appellant had taken her daughter to a place called 'Mahakali'. It is alleged that he had committed sexual intercourse with his daughter forcibly without her consent on the way to Mahakali. Thereafter he continued to indulge into occassional sexual intercourse with his d...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »