Mumbai Court August 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.
Harinarayan G. Bajaj Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
These applications arise out of proceedings in Criminal Case No.125/SW/2005 pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 40th Court, Girgaon, Mumbai, and the orders passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Mumbai on 16-7-2010 in Criminal Revision Application Nos.481 of 2010 and 590 of 2010 filed by the parties. 2. Before adverting to the challenges raised by the parties before this Court, it may be useful to briefly recount facts leading to the present proceedings. The applicant in Criminal Application No.431 of 2011 is the original complainant and the applicants in Criminal Application No.564 of 2011 are the original accused Nos.1 and 2 in Criminal Case No.125/SW/2005. For the sake of convenience, hereinafter they are referred to as the complainant and the accused. Accused No.1 is the sole proprietor of Creative Finance Co., partner of Creative Garments Limited (accused No.5 in the complaint) and Director of Creative Garments Limited (accused No.4). Accused Nos.2 and 3 a...
Chandresh Ramsurat Kurmi Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
Oral Judgment: This appeal is directed against the conviction of the appellant by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai for offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (for short, IPC) while the learned Judge acquitted the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 304B and 306 of IPC. The learned Judge imposed sentence of rigorous imprisonment of one year and fine of Rs.500/-, or in default, imprisonment for a further period of two months on the appellant. 2. The facts which are material for deciding this appeal are as under : Victim Hiravati was married to the appellant sometime in May, 1984 and lived with him at Mumbai till 24.8.1986 when she committed suicide by setting herself on fire. Police were informed and after performing inquest, police sent the dead body for post-mortem examination. On the report of Mr.Chetnarayan an offence was registered. In the course of investigation, police recorded the statements of witnesses and on completion of i...
Vijay Abhiman Barahate Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
Oral Judgment: 1. This Appeal is directed against the conviction of the appellant for the offences punishable under Section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code (for short, IPC) and sentence for rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.1000/, in default, further rigorous imprisonment for six months imposed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Niphad on conclusion of Special (Atrocity) Case No.12 of 2006 before him. 2. The facts which are material for deciding this appeal are as under : The appellant was neighbour of the victim's family. On 26.8.2006, when 5 years old victim had gone to the appellant's house, the appellant tried to forcibly commit sexual intercourse with her. On hearing her screams, her mother and other neighbours rushed there and rescued the victim. The victim's father was informed, who gave report on which an offence was registered. Since the victim belongs to the Scheduled Tribe, an offence was registered also under the provisions of the Scheduled...
Bhalchandra Pandurang Madhvi Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
P.C. Heard the Learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Applicant in Criminal Application No.482 of 2012, Learned APP for the State and the Learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant in Criminal Misc. Application No.1353 of 2012. 2. Criminal Application No.482 of 2012 is an application under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed by the Accused No.3. The Applicant/Accused No.3 alongwith other Accused have been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147/149, 148 and 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Applicant has invited our attention to the orders passed by this Court under which the Accused Nos.5 to 14 have been enlarged on bail. He submitted that out of two eye witnesses, whose evidence has been relied by the trial Court, P.W. 3 has not specifically deposed about the presence of the Applicant. He pointed out that P.W.1 has stated that the Applicant assaulted the deceased with a stick. He stated th...
Firoz Hyder Shaikh @ Kalya Firoz Vs. the Commissioner of Police and Ot ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
Oral Judgment: (A.M. Khanwilkar, J. ) 1. This letter petition was received through jail. It has been converted into Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the preventive detention order dated 5th September, 2011 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Brihan Mumbai in exercise of powers under Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Dangerous Persons and Video Pirates Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as `the said Act'). 2. Since the petition has been received through jail, we requested Mr.U.N.Tripathi to appear as amicus curiae to espouse the cause of the petitioner as also to assist the Court. We gave him liberty to file formal memo of petition to urge grounds as may be permissible in law to challenge the preventive detention order. The Public Prosecutor was requested to furnish complete compilation of the documents served on the detenu along with the grounds of detention to enable the...
Mahanagar Gas Limited Vs. M/S. Babulal Uttamchand and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
Oral Judgment: (Chief Justice) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 9 March 2012 of the learned Single Judge dismissing the arbitration petition of the appellant herein under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with the only modification of reducing the future rate of interest from 18% to 12% from the date of the award (5 March 2010) till realization on the claim as well as the counterclaim. 2. The appellant awarded the respondent (the claimant) the work of project management and construction of pipeline network for domestic supply of natural gas in the area of Santacrtuz by work order dated 12 October 2002. The said work was to be completed within three years from the date of letter of acceptance. The work was valued at Rs.3.87 crores. The respondent, accordingly, mobilised the requisite resources and made investment. The respondent was also required to enter into the agreement with the customers for providing gas connections. 3. The appell...
Shri Rosario S. Fernandes Vs. the State of Goa, Through Its Chief Secr ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
Oral Judgment: (A.P. Lavande, J.) Heard Mr. Menezes, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Mordekar, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents no.1 to 4 and Mr. Pangam, learned Counsel for respondent no.5. 2. By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 02/07/2004 exhibit G passed by respondent no.3 and resolution dated 06/12/2003 exhibit M passed by respondent no.5. 3. The case of the petitioner is as under: The petitioner is a citizen of India and is residing at House No.1519/A situated at Zuem, Baradi, Velim, Salcete, Goa (hereinafter referred to as 'the house' for short). Respondent no.1 is the authority vested with the powers under Article 372-A of the Goa Legislative Diploma No.2070 and Rules made thereunder known as the Code of Communidades (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') to decide the matters regarding regularisation of unauthorized occupation and encroachment of land vested in Communidade. Respondent no.5 is a body created under the Co...
Communidade of Chicalim Vs. Land Acquisition Officer and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
Oral Judgment: Heard Shri Teles, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant and Shri Lawande, learned Government Advocate appearing for the Respondent No.1. None for the Respondent no.2, though served. 2. The above Appeal challenges the Judgment and Award dated 29.06.2006, passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, South Goa, Margao, in Land Acquisition Case No.15/2003, whereby a reference filed by the Appellant under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (herein after referred to as the said 'Act'), came to be rejected. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that pursuant to a Notification under Section 4 of the said Act, published in the Official Gazette dated 24.08.2000, land was acquired belonging to the Appellant for the construction of a Telephone Exchange at Chicalim, Mormugao Taluka. The area acquired was part of the property surveyed under No.121 admeasuring an area of 2000 square metres. By an Award passed under Section 11 of the said Act, a sum of Rs.25/- per square...
Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd. Vs. Uday M. Raut and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
Oral Judgment: Heard Shri A.D. Bhobe, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Shri Pangam, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent no.1. 2. The above Petition challenges the Award dated 10.10.2003, passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal, whereby the learned Tribunal has exercised its powers under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act and interfered with the punishment which was inflicted by the Management whereby the services of the Respondent no.1 were terminated. The Tribunal by the impugned Award has modified the said punishment and has directed that the reinstatement of the Respondent no.1 without any back wages and withholding two increments. 3. Shri Bhobe, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, has assailed the impugned Award essentially on the ground that the Respondent no.1 was a habitual absentee and absented himself from reporting for duty and, as such, in an inquiry which was held, the findings to that effect were i...
Uttam Yesso Kerkar (Since Deceased) by Lrs. Vs. Dr. Antonio Afonso (De ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
Oral Judgment: Heard Shri G. Shirodkar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Shri M.B. Da Costa, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The above petition challenges the judgment dated 7/09/2006, passed by the learned Adhoc Additional District Judge at Panaji in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No.7/2006 whereby an appeal preferred by the respondents challenging the dismissal of the application for temporary injunction filed in Regular Civil Suit No.114/1999 dated 2/12/2005 was partly allowed and the application for temporary injunction filed by the respondents was granted and, as such, the petitioners, their agents and servants etc. were inter alia restrained from interfering with the possession of the respondents in the suit property except the room situated therein. 3. The above petition was taken up for interim reliefs before this Court and stay was granted on 7/09/2006 which was ordered to be continued by order dated 28/09/2006. Thereafter, an ad interim r...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »