Mumbai Court July 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.
Bharat Vitthal Shete Vs. Rohidas Manaji Wahleker and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-11-2012
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of parties heard finally. 2. This writ petition takes exception to the judgment and order in Grampanchayat Appeal No. 27 of 2011 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Nashik Division, Nashik dated 25th May 2011, thereby confirming the judgment and order dated 24th January 2011, passed by the Additional Collector, Ahmednagar in Grampanchayat Dispute No.48 of 2010. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that, the election of village Grampanchayat Pimpalgaon Khand, for the period 2010 to 2015 was held on 22nd August, 2010. The petitioner herein is declared elected member of the said Grampanchayat by defeating the respondent No.1 and other candidates who contested the said election from his ward. Thereafter, after few days the petitioner is elected as Sarpanch of the said Grampanchayat. The respondent No.1 herein, filed Dispute on 14th September, 2010, before the respondent No. 3 for setting aside the election of the petitioner as per th...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Abdul Jabbar Haji and Another
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-11-2012
Respondent No. 1 - Haji Abdul A. Habib Gigani is reported to be dead on 5/2/2009. Death Certificate is filed on record, which is marked as X for identification. No legal representative of the said respondent has applied for continuation of the appeal. Hence, appeal as against respondent No. 1 abates and is dismissed as such. 2. This Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 11/10/2000, passed by 6th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Akola in Criminal Case No. 1055 of 1995 whereby the learned trial Judge acquitted the respondents-accused of offenses punishable under Section 7(1) read with Section 16(ia)(i) and (ii) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. 3. The facts briefly stated are: - The complainant - Food Inspector had received charge of the case from earlier Food Inspector Shri S. M. Deshmukh, who had taken the sample of Sunflower Seed Oil on 10/1/1992, at about 14.30 hrs., from the shop of M/s Rafik Traders, Kirana Bazar, Akola. The Respondent No.1-accused was v...
Shri. D. Janardanan Vs. the New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-2012
Shri Narendra Kawde Honble Member: (1) This complaint has been filed alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Opponent New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Insurance Company) as the claim payable under Insurance policy to the Complainant has been repudiated wrongly. (2) The salient facts giving rise to this complaint are that the Complainant was in employment of Air India as a Flight Engineer holding flight engineers valid licence bearing No.153 effective from 08.01.1976. The said licence renewed from time to time thereafter. The Complainant was also a member of Indian Flight Engineers Association (IFEA), Mumbai. This Association is affiliated to International Federation of Airline Pilots Association (IFEA) and International Transport Workers Federation (ITE). The Complainant subscribed through Indian Flight Engineers Association to a policy, namely Loss of Flying Licence Insurance policy initially for a period 08.09.1999 to 07.09.2000 for sum assure...
Pathan Iliyas Khan Abdul Majid Khan and Others Vs. the State of Mahara ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-10-2012
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. Challenge is to order of respondent 3 Tahasildar, Badnapur cancelling the voting /poll scheduled on 24.10.2010 for division no. 3 of Gram Panchayat, Badnapur during its general elections in 2010 due to death of contestant Shri Chandramani Ramchandra Ragde on 23.10.2010. This has been done under Rule 14-A of the Bombay Gram Panchayat (Election) Rules,1959; hereinafter referred to as 1959 Rules framed under Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958, referred as 1958 Act. This Court issued notice on 2.11.2010 and on 6.11.2010, this Court stayed part of order countermanding the poll which affected other two seats in said division viz. open seat and OBC(woman) seat. The election of Sarpancha and Deputy Sarpancha was made subject to outcome of this writ petition and a connected writ petition. On 24.11.2010, the subsequent election programme was stayed. Petition was allowed to be amended on 9.12.2010 to assail proposed holding of elections from ward/division no. 2 from open...
Mrs. Shreya W/O Prashant Agale Vs. Prashant S/O Prakash Agale
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-10-2012
Oral Judgment: 1 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the parties. 2 This miscellaneous civil application is filed seeking transfer of divorce proceedings in Hindu Marriage Petition No.8 of 2011 pending before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Panvel, Taluka Panvel, District Raigad to any competent Court at Aurangabad. 3 Background facts of the case as disclosed in the application are as under: On 1st July, 2009, marriage between the Applicant and Respondent solemnized at Aurangabad. It is the case of the Applicant that, on 19th July, 2009, there was an illegal demand of Rs. 10,00,000/- by the Respondent to the Applicant and her parents for purchasing or expanding his office at Kalamboli. On failure of payment of Rs.10,00,000/-, the Respondent and his parents started harassing the Applicant. It is further case of the Applicant that, on denial by the Applicant of any kind of written consent for divorce, the Applicant was thrown out of her matrimonial ...
Tarun Chhanalal Shah Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-2012
P.C. 1. Heard counsel for the parties. For considering the submissions canvassed by the learned Counsel for the petitioner across the Bar, we deem it appropriate to reproduce the relief claimed in this petition, which reads thus:- “(a) that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to ensure that the Petitioner is restored back to the possession of the same flat, being Flat No.503 Gamdevi Deepak Co-operative Housing Society, 12 Kashibai Navrang Marg, Gamdevi, Mumbai - 400007 which has been auctioned and/or in the alternative, he be given compensation in lieu thereof or alternatively, the respondents be directed to hand over another flat in the same area/vicinity having 1000 sq. ft. area and similarly he be also compensated for the loss of 420.210 grams of gold, 14 kg. of silver and 14.95 Ct. of diamonds as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper;” 2. This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed in the following circu...
The State of Maharashtra Vs. Laxman Tukaram Dudhakohale
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-10-2012
Oral Judgment: Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. This Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 27th February, 2001 passed by learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Wardha in Session Trial No. 26 of 1996 whereby the respondent-accused was acquitted of offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Arms Act. 3. The facts in brief stated are as under: - First Informant namely Gajanan Marotrao Gohane, Aged about 27 years, Resident of Village Talodi, reported about the quarrel took place with his uncle on the pretext of sharing of amount in respect of cultivating the land. When the quarrel took place on 25/2/1995 at about 6.00 p.m., the first informant Gajanan came on the spot with his friend Ashok Giri and others. At that time, accused also came on the spot while first informant was talking with his friend near Hanuman Temple in the village Talodi. The accused was armed with Suri (Knife) and he had suddenly assaulted the first in...
The Manmandir Co-op. Bank Ltd. Vs. Shri.Tukaram Dattu Pawar and Anothe ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-2012
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 1. Both the petitions are filed for challenging the judgment and order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli. The petitioner, Co-operative Bank has filed a private complaints for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act against the respondent no.1. In one case viz. Case no.127 of 2008, there was a delay of two days caused for filing complaint and in the other proceeding there was delay of four days. The applications were moved for condonation of delay and notices of those applications were given to the accused. The Magistrate allowed the applications and condoned the delay subject to payment of cost of Rs.200/- in each proceedings. Those two orders made by the Magistrate came to be challenged in the Criminal Revision Application no.183/2009 and 184/2009. The Sessions Court has allowed the Revisions and has set aside the orders made by JMFC. The Sessions Court has observed that sufficient opportunity was not given to ...
The Commissioner of Income Tax And#8211; I Vs. Sanjivani (Takli) Ssk L ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-10-2012
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. Respective parties do not dispute that the question sought to be raised in all these Appeals stands concluded by the judgment dated 10.2.2012, in Tax Appeal No. 25 of 2008 -- The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limited, Killari, Tq. Ausa, District Latur, delivered by the Division Bench here at Aurangabad. This question formed issue no. 2 in Tax Appeal 25 of 2008. Two issues, as under, were pressed before this Court in that Tax Appeal:- (1) Whether an amount, for which a provision is made in the books of account by the assessee (a sugar factory), who maintains accounts on the mercantile basis, towards contribution made to a recognised research institute, can be allowed as a deduction under Section 35(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, if the amount is not actually paid in the relevant assessment year? (2) Whether the difference between the market price of sale of sugar and price of the sale of a small quantity of sugar made by the ...
The Commissioner of Income Tax And#8211; I Vs. Shri Ganesh Sahakari Sa ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-10-2012
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. All these Appeals under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by Revenue are to be disposed of finally at the stage of admission itself as per earlier orders passed by the Division Benches of this Court. After hearing respective Counsel, we find that following substantial questions of law fall for determination. (A) Whether the dis-allowance of difference between State Advised Price and Statutory Minimum Price paid by assessee Co-operative Societies to sugar cane farmers by the Assessing Officer has been correctly set aside concurrently by the Appellate Authorities under the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the facts and circumstances of the respective Cases? (B) Whether a Co-operative Society is not an association of persons within Section 40-A (2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 2. It has been brought to our notice that in Tax Appeal 3/2008 on 13.01.2011, Tax Appeal 54/2010 on 25.02.2012 followed the judgment of Hon. Apex Court in (2010) 13 SCC 527---Deputy Commissi...
- ‹ Prev
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- Next ›
- Last »