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.
State of Goa, Through the Land Acquisition Officer Pwd (Cell) and Anot ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-07-2012
Oral Judgment: This common judgment shall dispose all the above four appeals which arise out of the common judgment and award, dated 29/8/2002, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, South Goa (Reference Court, for short) in Land Acquisition Cases No. 228/1993, 229/1993, 230/1993 and 231/1993. 2. The applicants as well as the respondents are the same in all the said four cases. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the manner in which they appear in the cause title of the said land acquisition cases. 3. Vide notification published under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (L. A. Act, for short), in the Official Gazette dated 27/8/1987, land was acquired for improvement and black topping of Gorvotte road in V. P. Nuvem of Salcete Taluka. This included an area of 460 square metres of land from survey no. 66/1 of Nuvem village. The Land Acquisition Officer (L.A.O., for short) offered compensation at the rate of Rs. 5/- per square metre to the acquired land. ...
M/S. Steel and Steel Traders Through Its Proprietor Noor Sheikh Vs. Ne ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-2012
S. R. Khanzode, Presiding Judicial Member [1] This complaint refers to deficiency in service in connection with arbitrary repudiation of the insurance claim by the Opponent, namely New India Assurance Company Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Insurance Company for the sake of brevity). [2] Undisputed facts are that the Complainant, namely M/s. Steel and Steel Traders (hereinafter referred to as the Complainant for the sake of brevity) is a proprietary concern of Mr. Noor Sheikh having his shop at Shop No.20, Suleman Compound, Kurla Kalina Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai 400 029. The Complainants stock at the shop was insured with the insurance company under the Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy and the sum insured was of Rs. 65,00,000/-. Insurance policy was effective during the period 19/1/2005 to the midnight of 18/1/2006. In the unprecedented floods of 25th/26th July, 2005, the Complainant suffered a loss particularly because some of the stock swept away and particularly...
Afak Shabbir Khan Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-2012
P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. Two reliefs are claimed in this petition. The first is to entrust the investigation of the criminal case to an independent investigating agency. The second relief is to compensate the petitioner for his illegal arrest and detention contrary to the provisions of law. 3. In the case of co-accused Abdul Razak Hasan Dokadia, being Writ Petition (Cri.) No.2271 of 2012, somewhat similar arguments on the second count were considered and since the Court indicated its mind, the petitioner therein did not pursue that relief with liberty. However, in the present case, Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would invite decision on both the reliefs claimed by him. As a result, we proceed to examine the arguments on merits. 4. With regard to the first relief, at the outset, it may be noted that the petitioner is an accused. At the instance of the accused, the question of transferring investigation to some other agency and more particularly i...
M/S. Ameyas Infraprojects Pvt.Ltd. Formerly M/S.Ameya Developers Pvt. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-2012
Oral Judgment: (R.D. Dhanuka, J.) Rule returnable forthwith. By consent the petition is taken up for final hearing. 2. The Petitioner has prayed for a Writ of Certiorari for quashing an Order dated 7th October, 2008 passed by the Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India holding that the complaint filed by the Petitioner against Mr.Ajay B.Garg, a Chartered Accountant and the Member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India was frivolous and the papers relating to the case had been accordingly filed. The Petitioner has also prayed that the complaint made by the Petitioner against the 1st Respondent shall be decided after complying with the principles of natural justice. 3. The Petitioner was one of the partners of M/s. AAP Construction Company (hereinafter referred to as the said firm) having partners viz. (1) Atlanta Ltd. (2) PBA Infrastructure Ltd. and (3) Ameya Developers Pvt. Ltd. The partnership came into existence by Deed of Partnership executed by the pa...
M/S. Overseas Textiles Corporation and Others Vs. Special Director, En ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-2012
Oral Judgment: (R.D. Dhanuka, J.) 1. These appeals filed by the appellants under section 35 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as “FEMA”) read with section 54 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “FERA”) are directed against the order of the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange (hereinafter referred to as “Tribunal”) dated 30th April, 2009. 2. All these appeals arise out of common order passed by the Tribunal and were therefore heard together and being disposed of by a common order. Appeal No. 57 of 2009 is filed by M/s. Overseas Textiles Corporation (hereinafter referred to as “Firm”) and Appeal Nos. 56 of 2009, 58 of 2009, 59 of 2009, 60 of 2009 and 61 of 2009 are filed by the partners of the said firm. For the sake of convenience, facts in Appeal No. 57 of 2009 are discussed in this order. 3. By the impugned order the Tribunal has sustained the findings of the Sp...
Yogesh Nandu Pujari Vs. Commissioner of Police and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-2012
Oral Judgment: (A.M. Khanwilkar, J.) Heard Counsel for the parties. 2) This Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, takes exception to the preventive detention order passed by the Commissioner of Police, Thane, dated 25th January, 2012, in exercise of powers under Section 3(2) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug-offenders and Dangerous Persons and Video Pirates Act, 1981. 3) The Petitioner, after being taken into custody in connection with the impugned detention order, was served with grounds of detention dated 25th January, 2012, along with the copies of the documents relied upon by the Detaining Authority in forming his subjective satisfaction. 4) Broadly, two contentions have been raised before us. We would deal with the first contention. According to the Petitioner, the Detaining Authority has relied upon the injury certificates issued by C. S. M. Hospital, Kalwa, T. M. C., Thane, dated 6th August, 2011, describing...
Smt. Vasanati Narayan Naik and Others Vs. Guru Shirodkar Alias Guru Ma ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-06-2012
Oral Judgment: Heard Shri Pangam, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, Shri G. Shirodkar, learned Counsel, in person and representing Respondent nos. 1 to 5, 7, 9 and 10 and Shri S. R. Rivonkar, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent nos. 11 and 12. 2. Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel and the respective parties. The learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents waives service. 3. The short point for consideration in the above Petition is the legality of the Order dated 30.06.2011 passed in Misc. 138/11/COND/TRA in Tenancy Revision Application no. UN-REG./2011. By the impugned Order, the Tribunal has refused to condone the delay occasioned to the Petitioners to file a revision challenging an Order passed by the learned Deputy Collector dated 29.04.2009 in Tenancy Revision Application no. 25/2008 upholding the Order of the learned Mamlatdar, dated 18.11.2008. 4. Shri Pangam, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, has assailed the impug...
Kapil Chopra Vs. Kunal Deshmukh and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-2012
CHIEF JUSTICE Greed and deceit are two human traits which are very often part of the stories of Hindi films. These traits also seem to be writ large on the defence of Respondents 1 and 2, (director and producer of film “Jannat-2”) in the action taken out by the appellant plaintiff for infringement of copy right and for breach of confidence, wherein it is the case of the appellant-plaintiff that the plaintiff had given to Respondent/Defendant No.1 and Defendant No.1 accepts that the plaintiff had given to Defendant No.1 the story for a film. 2. The plaintiff has filed Suit (Lodging) No.1182 of 2012 and also filed Notice of Motion (Lodging) No.1490 of 2012 for injunction against the release of the film “Jannat-2” directed by Defendant No.1 and produced by Defendant No.2. It is the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff had registered his script “Zero” with the Film Writers Association on 12 November, 2007 and that the film 'Jannat 2' was in clear inf...
M/S. Ameyas Infraprojects Pvt.Ltd. Formerly M/S.Ameya Developers Pvt. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-2012
Oral Judgment: (R.D. Dhanuka, J.) Rule returnable forthwith. By consent the petition is taken up for final hearing. 2. The Petitioner has prayed for a Writ of Certiorari for quashing an Order dated 7th October, 2008 passed by the Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India holding that the complaint filed by the Petitioner against Mr.Ajay B.Garg, a Chartered Accountant and the Member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India was frivolous and the papers relating to the case had been accordingly filed. The Petitioner has also prayed that the complaint made by the Petitioner against the 1st Respondent shall be decided after complying with the principles of natural justice. 3. The Petitioner was one of the partners of M/s. AAP Construction Company (hereinafter referred to as the said firm) having partners viz. (1) Atlanta Ltd. (2) PBA Infrastructure Ltd. and (3) Ameya Developers Pvt. Ltd. The partnership came into existence by Deed of Partnership executed by the pa...
Afak Shabbir Khan Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-2012
P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. Two reliefs are claimed in this petition. The first is to entrust the investigation of the criminal case to an independent investigating agency. The second relief is to compensate the petitioner for his illegal arrest and detention contrary to the provisions of law. 3. In the case of co-accused Abdul Razak Hasan Dokadia, being Writ Petition (Cri.) No.2271 of 2012, somewhat similar arguments on the second count were considered and since the Court indicated its mind, the petitioner therein did not pursue that relief with liberty. However, in the present case, Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would invite decision on both the reliefs claimed by him. As a result, we proceed to examine the arguments on merits. 4. With regard to the first relief, at the outset, it may be noted that the petitioner is an accused. At the instance of the accused, the question of transferring investigation to some other agency and more particularly i...
- ‹ Prev
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- Next ›
- Last »