Mumbai Court September 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.
Godrej Industries Limited and Others Vs. ColIn Mario Rebello and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
M. Jamdar, J. 1. These four appeals arise from the orders passed in two Arbitration Petitions, which were heard together by the learned single Judge. By the impugned order dated 11 May 2012, the learned single Judge has allowed the arbitration petitions and has restrained the appellants from in any manner dealing with certain shares of Gharda Chemicals Ltd. The issues raised in these appeals being common, they are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment. 2. Arbitration Petition No.444 of 2012 was filed by Jer Rutton Kavasmaneck and Darius Rutton Kavasmaneck. Arbitration Petition (L) No.398 of 2012 was filed by Colin Rebello. Godrej Industries and Aban and Percy Kavasmaneck were contesting respondents in the petitions. These two sets of respondents in the arbitration petitions have filed the present four appeals. Along with the appeals we have also taken up two Arbitration Applications filed by Jer and Darius Kavasmanecks, and Colin Rebello under section 11 of the Arbitra...
Dnyaneshwar M. Satav Vs. Jalindhar Dgondiba Kharabi and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
Rule. The contesting respondent waives service. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith. Since the office report is that service is complete, with the consent of parties appearing through advocates, the writ petition is disposed of finally by this judgment. 2} By this writ petition under Article 226 and Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune in Gram Panchayat Appeal No.68 of 2011 dated 20th December 2011, confirming the view and order of the Collector dated 15th June 2011 in Application No.14 of 2011. 3} The proceedings are under the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958 (for short the Act). 4} The petitioner states that the elections to Gram Panchayat, Kharabwadi, Taluka Khed, District Pune were held and the petitioner was elected. This was a general election of the Gram Panchayat, which was notified on 30th June 2010. The seat in question, namely, Ward No.4 was unreserved. One Lata V...
Yash Tejpal Shah and Others Vs. M/S. Shree Ashtavinayak Cine Vision Lt ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
1. The applicants are the Judgment Creditors under a Consent Award dated 29th October, 2011 executed by and between the applicant and respondent No.1 as the Judgment Debtor under which Rs. 41 crores was to be paid by Respondent Nos.1 and 2 with interest thereon @ 27% p.a. from 1st October, 2011 until payment The Consent Award constitutes a money decree. A paramount lien is created in favour of the Applicants under clause 2 of the Award on the income of the respondent No.1 from various films which he would produce. The payment of installments as agreed by and between the parties came to be set out in the Award. It was specifically provided that upon committing default of any one installment on those dues dates the entire outstanding amount would become due and payable and the award would become executable. First three installments were paid. Thereafter there was defaults. Further time was asked for and granted under letters of the parties which correspondence is admitted. Rs. 36.26 cror...
M/S. Tanna Exports Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
S.J. Vazifdar, J. 1. This is a Reference under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arising out of the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) dated 23rd November, 1994 in ITA No.763/Bom/1992 pertaining to the assessment year 1989-1990. The Tribunal on the assessee's application drew up the statement of claim and framed the following question for the opinion of this Court:- Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that while computing the profits for the purpose of deduction u/s. 80HHC, interest income of Rs.40,20,418/- was required to be excluded? 2. The applicant-assessee is engaged in the business of export, inter-alia, of rice, green peas and hardware. The assessee filed its return of income of Rs.8,44,690/- on 31st October, 1989 and a revised return on 7th March, 1990, declaring an income of Rs.4,46,920/-. The Assessing Officer, by an order dated 21st January, 1991, assessed the total income at Rs.48,05...
Abhay Madhukar Murkhe Vs. Mumbai Municipal Corporation Through Its Mun ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
Oral Judgment: (Chief Justice) Rule, returnable forthwith. Ms. Modle waives service of Rule for the respondent-Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. In the facts and circumstances of the case the petition is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner belongs to Special Backward category. He suffers from disability of 100% hearing impairment. There is no dispute about the fact that the respondent Corporation has reserved posts of clerks for persons with disabilities as required under the provisions of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. The respondent-Municipal Corporation had issued an advertisement in the year 2008 and invited applications for the posts of clerk including for the posts of clerk reserved for three different disabilities i.e. visual disability, hearing impairment disability and locomotive disability. The petitioner had applied in response to the advertisement for the post reserved for persons...
Rajendra A. Shah (H.U.F.) (Constituent) Vs. M/S. Angel Capital and Deb ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
Oral Judgment: The Petitioner (original Respondent) has challenged award dated 17th February, 2009 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal constituted under the Bye-laws, Rules and Regulations of National Stock Exchange of India (for short NSEIL). 2. The basic case of the Applicant/Petitioner is as under: The Petitioner is a constituent and the Respondent is a trading member. A Member Client Agreement was executed in June, 2004. as there was debit of Rs.9,16,685/- on 31st March, 2008 in the NSE FandO segment in the account of Petitioner-original Respondent and as no payment made though demanded and therefore, arose dispute. The Respondent filed the claim/reference. It was contested and counter claim was also raised. 3. The Respondent has also stated that he had given the collateral securities worth Rs.16 lacs, which were lying with the Claimant from the year 2007 onward. The Respondent admitted on 21st January, 2008, due to the collapse of market was asked to pay Rs.10 lacs immediately. He gav...
Bansi Singh S/O Kishan Singh and Others Vs. Narayan S/O Harchandra Cha ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties. 2. The petitioners - original defendants are taking exception to the order dated 27.02.2012, below application Exhibit-118 in Regular Civil Suit No.415/2010. 3. Respondent No.1 - original plaintiff instituted suit claiming decree of perpetual injunction against petitioners- original defendants restraining them from obstructing plaintiff's work of laying underground pipeline through G.No.7 to G.No.18. 4. It is not necessary to go into factual details of the matter. During the course of cross examination of the witness for defendants, plaintiff's Counsel confronted the witness with document styled as consent deed dated 23.08.1997. The witness for defendants stated that the document does not bear signature of his father. Since the document was shown to the witness, a request was made by Counsel for the plaintiff to exhibit the document. The request made on behalf of the plaintiff w...
Pruthaviraj S/O Milanlal Chavan Vs. Dhanraj S/O Balasaheb Suryawanshi ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
Oral Judgment: Heard. 2. Admit. 3. With the consent of the parties, the appeal is taken up for final hearing. 4. The present Respondent No.1 had filed claim petition U/s 166 of the M.V.Act, on account of the disability sustained by him in an accident. The Tribunal partly allowed the said claim petition. The owner of the vehicle has filed the present appeal. 5. Mr.Deshmukh, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Insurance Company has been exonerated on the ground that there was a breach of policy. The Tribunal did not frame any issue in that regard. There was not a single issue framed with regard to the alleged plea taken by the Insurance Company and the Insurance Company was exonerated only on the ground that the driver of the vehicle possessed the license to drive the light motor vehicle and not tourist light motor vehicle. The vehicle was Maruti Esteem, admittedly a light motor vehicle. According to the learned counsel no evidence was led in this regard in absence of the ...
Digamber Pandarinath Khandagale and Another Vs. the Post Master Mohone ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
S. R. Khanzode, Presiding Judicial Member [1] Heard Adv. N. V. Sharma on behalf of the Complainants and Adv. N. J. Gonsalves on behalf of the Opponents. [2] This consumer complaint pertains to alleged deficiency in service on the part of the Department of Posts for not paying interest on the deposits made by the Complainants to the extent of Rs. 6,00,000/- under the Postal Departments Monthly Income Scheme (hereinafter referred to as the MIS for the sake of brevity). The relief claimed by the Complainants as per the prayer clause is compensation of Rs. 25,00,000/- and the relief claim is worded as follows:- a. That the Honble Court be please to grant award of Rs.25 Lacks against the opponent post office for detention of complainants deposits and interests being Senior Citizens by colorization practice of opponents and without following due process of law by the opponents. b. That by interim and ad-interim order the Opponent be ordered to pay interests of Rs.3,79,550=00, to the Senior ...
iffco Tokio General Insurance Co Ltd, Mumbai Vs. Deepak Kishan Goradia ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member, J. 1. Heard Mr.Mehta, Advocate for the appellant and Mr. Ashutosh Marathe, Advocate for the respondent. 2. This appeal has been filed by the appellant/Insurance Company against the award passed on 21/05/2010 by District Forum, Mumbai Suburban in consumer complaint No.473/2008, Mr.Deepak Kishan Goradia V/s. IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd.. By allowing the complaint partly, opponent/Insurance Company has been directed to pay `1,26,237/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from 08/10/2007 till realization of the entire amount and has been further directed to pay costs of proceeding of Rs. 2,000/- to the complainant. As such Insurance Company has filed this appeal. 3. The facts to the extent material may be stated as under:- The complainant owned a car bearing No.MH-04-CJ-5692. It was insured with the appellant/Insurance Company. On 14/09/2007 while he was traveling by his car, a car ahead of his own car stopped abruptly and driver of the compla...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »