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.
Desmond Anthony D'Souza Vs. SBi Mutual Fund
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-2012
Oral Judgment: (Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) The Petitioner, who appears in person, has filed these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking the following reliefs: (i) An order setting aside a scheme of merger of the One India Fund floated by the State Bank of India (SBI) with the SBI Magnum Equity Fund; (ii) A direction to the management of the SBI Mutual Fund to call a meeting of all investors, seeking their views on whether the swap ratio is fair and why no dividend was declared for more than five years; (iii) An independent audit into the affairs of the One India Fund; and (iv) In the alternative, that the deposit of Rs.2 lakhs made by the Petitioner be returned with interest as applicable to Fixed Deposits together with an additional amount of 0.5 percent applicable to senior citizens. 2. In December 2006, the Petitioner invested an amount of Rs.2 lakhs in a Mutual Fund by the name of One India Fund floated by SBI in respect of which he was allotted 20,000 units in ...
Suresh Navsa Ghatal Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-2012
Mrs. V.K. Tahilramani, J. 1. The Appellant/Original Accused has directed this Appeal against the Judgment and order dated 21st July, 2004, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dadra and Nagar Haveli at Silvassa in Sessions Case No. 6 of 2003. By the said Judgment and order, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the Appellant for the offence under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/in default R.I. for one year. 2. The prosecution case, briefly stated, is as under: P.W.No.1 Chaita Bapji Ghatal was residing in Karchond Ghatal Pada, district Dadara and Nagar Haveli. His father Bapji Ghatal was residing near his house. Bapji Ghatal is the deceased in the present case. The father of the Appellant is brother of Bapji Ghatal i.e. deceased. Father of the Appellant had expired about 4 to 5 years before the incident. There was dispute in relation to land between Bapji Ghatal and the Appellant. Bapji Ghatal was asking the Appe...
Sudam Laxman Kute Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-2012
Oral Judgment: This appeal is directed against the conviction of the appellant, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik, for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for three months with fine of Rs. 10,000/- or in default of payment of fine rigorous imprisonment for further period of three months, imposed upon the appellant on the conclusion of trial of Sessions Case No.133 of 1995, before him. By the said judgment the learned Judge had acquitted the appellant for offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code and acquitted all the other co-accused of all the offences for which they were charged. 2. Facts which are material for deciding this appeal are as under:- Victim Sangita was married to appellant on 29.4.1994. There were grievances of the appellant's family about Sangita's inability to perform domestic work. It was alleged that when Sangita had been to her parent's house for festival of Sankr...
Vishal Ishwar KulThe Vs. the State of Maharashtra Through the Secretar ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-2012
D.D. Sinha, J. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent no.1, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 and 3 and learned counsel for the respondent no. 4. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is seeking quashing and setting aside the tender notices dated 30.3.2011 and 11.4.2011, as well as the General Body Resolution dated 5.5.2011, Resolution of Standing Committee dated 12.5.2011 and the Letter of Acceptance dated 12.5.2011 issued in favour of the respondent no. 4 as well as revocation of Work Order issued in favour of the respondent no. 4. The counsel for the petitioner has contended that the grievance of the petitioner is in respect of tender notices dated 30.3.2011 and 14.4.2011 issued by the respondent no.2-Corporation whereby offers were invited for appointing Octroi and Escort Fees Collection Agent for Nashik Municipal Corporation for the financial year 2011-2012, on the ground that ...
Beni @ Sddhu Clement Placal Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-2012
Oral Judgment: (A.S. Oka, J.) Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the Respondent-State. 2. A challenge in this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the order dated 18th April, 2012 passed in the purported exercise of powers under Section 56(1)(a) (b) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act"). By the said order, the Petitioner was ordered to be externed for a period of two years from Bombay as well as Bombay Suburban Districts. There is also a challenge to the order in Appeal passed by the State Government, by which the order of externment was confirmed. 3. The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submitted that the Externing Authority has not recorded subjective satisfaction that the witnesses were not willing to come forward to depose against the Petitioner out of fear. Her submission is that, in absence of any such subjective satisfaction recorded by the Externing Authorit...
Shardabai Dhondiram Mane Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-2012
Oral Judgment: [Smt. V.K. Tahilramani, J.] 1. The Appellant is the original accused No.2. By the Judgment and order dated 10th September, 2004 in Sessions Case No. 29 of 2004, the learned VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli convicted he Appellant under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The Appellant was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/in default, R.I. for six months. 2. The prosecution case is that on 14th August, 2003 at about 23 hours in the land bearing Gat No.506 of Pandurang Dadu Madane at village Karanje, the Appellant along with coaccused in furtherance of their common intention assaulted deceased Dhondiram Bhairu Mane by means of sticks of babhul and bamboo and forcibly administered poison by name Rogar and as a result, said Dhondiram died the next day. P.W.No.7 ASI Bapu Dayanu Chandane lodged the First Information Report (FIR). Thereafter, investigation commenced. After completion of investigation chargesheet c...
Yogesh Hanmant Madane Vs. and Another State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-2012
Oral Judgment: (Per V.M. Kanade, J.) 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant and the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent. 2. Appellant has filed this appeal, challenging the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court which was pleased to convict the Appellant inter alia for the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life. 3. Prosecution case in brief is that there was some dispute regarding right of way of the deceased and his family members over the land owned by the accused. Prosecution case is that on the date of the incident, in the morning, the deceased and his family members had used the said land belonging to the accused and at this stage there was an altercation between the two and the members pf the family of accused No.1 abused the members of the family of the deceased. The deceased and his family members, therefore, came to the house of the accused to que...
Aadinath Rambhau Garje and Another Vs. the State of Maharashtra and An ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-2012
1. Heard rival submissions on both the appeals which are being disposed of by this common judgment and order as both the appeals are arising out of the judgment and order of conviction of appellant/orig. accused No.1 in Criminal Appeal No.750 of 2005. Original accused No.1 (i.e. appellant in Criminal Appeal No.750/2005) was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and was also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC. On each count, he was sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs.500/in default SI for one month. Said judgment and order was passed by the 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Pune vide order dated 5th March, 2004 in Sessions Case No.157 of 2003. 2. By the said judgment and order, original accused No.2 one Satyabhama Jadhawar was acquitted of both the charges i.e. offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and also punishable under Section 307 of IPC. Against the acquittal of said accused No.2, there is no appeal preferred b...
Mogamat Faldi Jakoet and Another Vs. Union of India, Narcotics Control ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-2012
This appeal is directed against the conviction of the appellants, by the learned Special Judge for trial of cases under N.D.P.S. Act, at Mumbai, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 22(c), 28, 23(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short called as, "N.D.P.S. Act"), and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- or in default rigorous imprisonment for further period of three months, imposed upon them, on the conclusion of trial under NDPS Special Case No.80 of 2003. 2. The facts which are material for deciding this appeal are as under:- On 5th July, 2003, Officer of the N.C.B. Shri. Sanjay Gokhale, received information at 5.00 p.m. that one person by name Jakoet staying with a partner in Hotel Ajanta at Juhu, was to take flight to South Africa on 6th July, 2003 to 12th July, 2003, carrying 65 Kg mandrax tablets in check-in-baggage which would be concealed by using carbon paper to avoid detection by x-ray machin...
Ndt Systems, Through Partners of the Erstwhile Firm and Others Vs. the ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-2012
M.S. Sanklecha, J. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks to quash a notice dated 20/3/2012 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.(the Act). The impugned notice seeks to reopen the assessment for the assessment year 2007-08 on the ground that the Assessing officer has reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act. 2) At the request of the Advocates for the petitioner and the respondent the petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. 3) Brief facts leading to this petition are as follows: a) At all times relevant to this petition, the petitioner firm was engaged in non destructive testing business which includes testing of the blasting contents of the plant and machinery along with building which are being installed by its clients. This activity of testing was mainly supervised and controlled by the guidelines issued by Bhabha Automatic Resea...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »