Mumbai Court January 2013 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.
Society of the Franciscan (Hospitaller) Sisters Vs. Deputy Directors o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-2013
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J. 1. The Petitioner is a public trust registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 and conducts educational institutions all over India as well as homes for the elderly, hostels for small children and health centres for the poor and needy. On 14 July 1975, the Petitioner was granted a registration under section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (`the Act'). On 6 September 1986, an amendment was made to the objects of the Petitioner and as amended, the objects clause, insofar as material, reads as follows : "3. The Society is established for educational, medical relief, religious and charitable objects for the benefit of women and children in India, primarily Catholics, and in consonant with Catholic principles for all persons irrespective of race, community, caste, religion, language or social status; and in furtherance of the above objects. (a) To take over, conduct, develop, improve equip, administer and carry on such of the religious educational, medical ...
Charulata @ Renuka Haresh Lulla Vs. Gul Khanchand Gidwani and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-2013
1. The above petition is filed for issue of letters of administration with the will of the deceased Dr. Nari Kriplani annexed thereto. The plaintiff was known to the deceased as the daughter of the friend of the deceased. The wife of the deceased had predeceased him. He had no issues. His parents and sisters had also predeceased him. He had no brothers. The plaintiff was issued letters of administration with the will of the deceased annexed thereto. Thereafter original defendant herein filed her caveat. She was the daughter of the aunt of the deceased. Hence she was the only heir of the deceased. She has been allowed to challenge the letters of administration granted. She has filed her affidavit-in-support of her caveat. She claimed that the will was executed by practicing fraud upon the deceased exercising undue influence upon the deceased and has been executed by misrepresentation under undue influence of the plaintiff. 2. The original caveatrix having expired, her heirs have been br...
Abhyudaya Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Rainproof Exports Pvt. Ltd. and O ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-2013
Oral judgment: 1. By consent of parties as the facts and the issues involved in all the above three matters are identical were heard together finally and are being disposed of by a common order. 2. By these petitions filed under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short Arbitration Act, 1996) the petitioner seeks to challenge orders dated 9th May, 2011 allowing application filed by the respondents under section 16 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 and directing the petitioner to withdraw the proceedings filed by the petitioner under section 84 of the Multi State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 (for short Multi State Act) and for referring them to the Divisional Joint Registrar Co-operative Societies, Bombay. 3. I shall deal with the facts in Arbitration Petition No. 935 of 2012. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding these petitions are setout as under:- 4. The petitioner was originally registered under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 19...
Anilkumar Phoolchand Sanghvi and Others Vs. Chandrakant Phoolchand San ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-2013
Oral Order: (Chief Justice) This appeal is directed against the following order of the learned Single Judge, dated 14 January 2013:- If the Mediator does not finalize the proposal placed before him and submit his final report as stated on or before 15 March 2013, this Appeal from Order to stand dismissed without any further reference to the Court. 2. Appointment of the Mediator was made by another learned Single Judge of this Court by order dated 7 September 2012 in Arbitration Application No.34 of 2012, which was filed by the present respondents under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Arbitration Act). In the said arbitration application, the Court passed consent order dated 7 September 2012 recording that both the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the contesting parties had agreed before the Court that they would explore the possibility of a mediated settlement since the parties are closely related (parties are brothe...
Rama Atmaram Dahiwal and Another Vs. Executive Engineer, Maharashtra J ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-23-2013
A.H. Joshi, J. This is an appeal by the employees, who are the original complainants. They had filed the complaint before the Labour Court, under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (Hereinafter referred to as "MRTU and PULP Act"). 2. The facts, which the appellants had narrated in the complaint are summarized as follows: (a) The complainant No.1 was appointed on 02.07.1989, whereas complainant No.2 was appointed on 01.01.1989. (b) Their services were terminated by the employer, by oral order on 17.09.2001. (c) Their contention and claim under section 28 of the MRTU and PULP Act was:- (i) Termination was effected without following mandatory requirement of Section 25(F) and (G) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and Section 4 of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946. (ii) Termination was on account of reasons which were not truthful and without notice, notice pay and payment of retrenchment compensation. (iii...
M/S Procter and Gamble Home Products Limited Vs. State of Goa, Through ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-23-2013
Oral Judgment: (V.M. Kanade, J.) Heard. 2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By consent heard forthwith. 3. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner is challenging order dated 3.1.2013 whereby the goods of the petitioner were seized by the Inspector, Legal Metrology Department by issuing two seizure memos which are annexed at Exhibit A. 4. Brief facts are as under:- The petitioner is a Private Limited Company incorporated under the Provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. The dealers of the petitioner M/s CMM Tradelinks Pvt. Ltd and M/s. CMM Logistics Pvt. Ltd are their marketing agents for the distribution of the product manufactured by them. The respondent nos. 3 and 4 visited the godown of M/s CMM Tradelinks Pvt. Ltd and CMM Logistics Pvt Ltd and seized the said product manufactured and processed for the distribution by the petitioner with a direction not to sell the said product until further orders. 5. It is submitted by learned cou...
State Vs. Prakash Wadar and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-23-2013
U.V. Bakre, J. 1. This is State appeal against acquittal. 2. Both respondents were the accused persons in Sessions Case No. 16 of 2007. The said case was culmination of a charge sheet filed by Curchorem Police against the accused for offence punishable under Sections 447, 307, 323, 427, 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C., for short). 3. Case of the prosecution, in short, was that on 10/06/2006 at about 18.30 hours at Guddemol, Sanvordem, Sanguem, Goa, the accused persons in furtherance of their common intention criminally trespassed into the courtyard of Smt. Sapana Desai, armed with wooden danda and bamboo danda and damaged the scooter bearing no. GA-02/E-0740 belonging to her, assaulted her husband namely Ganaba Desai with the said dandas on his head with intention to kill him and thereby causing grievous injuries to him and when Smt. Sapana and her son Gangesh Desai intervened to help Ganaba Desai, they were also assaulted and they sustained simple injuries an...
Shubhangi Pradeep Chinnawar Vs. State of Maharashtra Through Secretary ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-23-2013
Sunil P. Deshmukh, J. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally, by consent. 2. A very poignant state of affairs surfaces in the matter. 3. Notice of petition sent by this court for final disposal and the further notice and/or intimation through e-mail and fax, are served on the Respondent No. 4, yet it has failed to put in appearance on its behalf. This failure to appear before this court in the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem, not only impedes the cause of justice and treatment to patient-petitioner affected due to failure of kidney, despite availability of a person who is ready to donate kidney for transplantation in the body of the petitioner. 4. It appears that under the provisions of the Transplantation of Human Organs Act, 1994 and Rules, 1995, a proposal for transplantation of human organ, in the present case, kidney is to be forwarded through Respondent No.4 to the authorization committee-respondent No.3, constituted pursuant to Section 9(4)(b) of sai...
Jude E. Pereira Vs. State of Goa, Through the Secretary (Arts and Cult ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-23-2013
Oral Judgment: V.M. Kanade, J. 1. Heard Mr. S. D. Lotlikar, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. S. Dhargalkar, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2, Mr. D. Pangam, learned Advocate for respondent No.3 and Mr. R. Gawthankar, learned Advocate for respondent No.4. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. 3. By this petition which is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner had initially claimed the following two reliefs : i) For a Writ of Mandamus, or any other writ, direction or order; directing the Respondents to open the Financial-Bid, and finalize the award of contract for running the Canteen at the 'RAVINDRA-BHAVAN', Margao, before 10th November, 2012; and in any event, before the Petitioner is asked to vacate the Canteen premises. ii) For an Order, restraining the Respondent No.3 from interfering with the Petitioner's running the said Canteen at the 'RAVINDRA-BHAVAN', Margao-Goa, pending the finali...
Naresh Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jan-23-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard learned Counsel Mr. R.M. Daga for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. S.M. Bhagde for the non-applicant/State. 2. Admit. Heard finally by consent of learned counsel for the parties. 3. The applicant feels aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.5, Nagpur on 15th December, 2012 on Exh.1 in Misc. Criminal Application No.1841/2012. The learned Magistrate has directed return of seized gold ornaments and gold nugget weighing 2659 gram and 730 miligram to the original applicant on execution of personal bond of Rs.78,00,000/- and bonds of two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,00,000/- each. 4. The applicant was the original complainant and he claims to be the owner of the property. The property recovered by the police is the stolen property recovered during the course of investigation of Crime No.184/2012. Naresh Nemichand Kothari-the applicant herein was the complainant in the said case and it was alleged t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »