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.
M/S. Mundhe Contractors Through Its Partner Mr. Ramesh Vs. the State o ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-21-2013
A.H. Joshi, J. 1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Contesting parties have filed their affidavits, rejoinders etc. Heard finally by consent of parties. 2] Subject matter pertains to allotment of tender for the work described as Package No.1463. In the tender notice, work is described as follows: PACKAGE NO. MH 1463 NAME OF WORK : Construction of Bridge on SH-176 to Dadhegaon @ Ch0/ 600, 2. Construction of Bridge on SH-176 Bantakali@ Ch.4/00 3] The bidding system provided for the facility of uploading the bid/offer for any one or for all i.e. 29 jobs. Offering was to be done by uploading documents, tenders etc. on email on the website of respondent Nos. 2 to 4. 4] The petitioner has participated in the bid for the work/project listed at item No. 21 in the tender notice for the work referred to above. 5] A list of the documents which are to be uploaded on the site under the title technical cover, was incorporated in internal page No.9 of the tender document. The document described ...
Shashikant Goma Patil and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-18-2013
P.C. Heard Mr.Nitin Sejpal, learned counsel for the applicants. Heard Ms.S.V. Sonawane, learned APP for the State. Heard Mr.Prashant Patil, learned counsel who sought intervention on behalf of the First Informant to oppose the grant of bail. 2. I have gone through the First Information Report and glanced through the statements recorded during investigation. There exists a prima facie case of cruelty against the applicants. 3. It appears that the deceased Minal committed suicide. There is no suspicion that the death of the said Minal is homicidal. 4. The applicants are in custody since 12 December 2012. Their further detention does not seem to be essential from the point of view of investigation. 5. Keeping this in mind, I am inclined to release them on bail. 6. The applicants are ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.30,000/- each with one surety in like amount, on the condition to attend the concerned police station, and make themselves available for investigation/interrogat...
Shri Kishore Ahuja Vs. Balkrishna C. Kadam and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-18-2013
Oral Judgment: 1 The Writ Jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is invoked against the Award dated 31/12/2004 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, 4th Labour Court, Mumbai by which Award the Reference filed by the Respondent herein has been allowed and the Petitioner-Company has been directed to reinstate the workman i.e. the Respondent herein in service with continuity of service and full back wages w.e.f. 30.09.1996. 2 The factual matrix involved in the above Petition can be stated thus: The workman i.e. the Respondent herein claimed to be in employment of one M/s. Gokul Diary Farm for a period of six years prior to the date of his alleged illegal termination of service. It was his case that the said Gokul Dairy Farm was paying him Rs.2000/per month and the business of of the said farm was of supply of milk. It was his case that the said farm was supplying milk to the small dairies on commission basis. It was his case that the said far...
Maharashtra State Handicapped Employees'/Officers' Association Vs. the ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-18-2013
Oral Order: (Chief Justice) 1. Rule. Learned counsel for respondents waive service. In the facts and circumstances of the case, petition is taken up for final hearing. 2 By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the decision of the respondent-authority revoking the special traveling allowance to the government employees and semi-government employees suffering from blindness. The petitioner has particularly challenged order dated 17 June 2011 issued by the Chief Executive Officer. Zilla Parishad, Nashik. The CEO of Zilla Parishad, Nashik has issued the above order on the basis of the Government Resolution dated 4 June 2001, which provides for special traveling allowance to the disabled government employee for the purpose of travel between the place of duty and the place of his residence belonging to following categories:- (a) Orthopedically handicapped with 40% or 505 permanent partial disability of both the upper and lower extremity ...
Sahyadri Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ot ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-18-2013
Oral Judgment: (Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) 1. Rule, by consent returnable forthwith. With the consent of Counsel and at their request the Petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal. 2. The Petitioner is a society registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 and engages in the business of manufacture of sugarcane by crushing sugarcane supplied by its members. The issue in the present case relates to the validity of a notice issued to the Petitioner under Section 23 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2005 on 17 January 2012. The two assessment years to which the notices relate are AY 2005-6 and 2006-7. The contention of the Petitioner is that the assessments for 2005-6 and 2006-7 became barred by limitation on 31 March 2009 and 31 March 2010. Hence, it has been urged that the notices are unlawful. 3. Though in the petition as originally filed there is a challenge to the constitutional validity of the provisions of Section 23 (3A) as amended by Ordinance ...
Deepak Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-18-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. Appellant - Deepak is convicted in Sessions Case No.16/1999 for an offence under Section 307 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code, directing to undergo S.I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, R.I. for one year; for an offence under Section 326 r/w 34 of IPC, for five years and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default, R.I. for six months. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 3. Accused No.1 - Sanjay had preferred Criminal Appeal No.10/2000, however, owing to his death, the appeal is already abated. 4. The other two accused are acquitted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, for which no State appeal is preferred. 5. The incident of lifting of five pigs belonging to injured Naresh or his brother Rohtas gave cause to the events. On 19.08.1998, when the complainant - Naresh, his brother Rohtas had brought back the stolen pigs to home, then in the evening at around 8.30 p.m., the appellant - Deepak,...
Yogendrasing Pralhadsing Rajpur (Pardeshi) Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-18-2013
Oral Judgment: With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this criminal revision application is admitted and heard finally, at this stage. 2. The Applicant, by this criminal revision application, challenges his conviction and sentence awarded by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sindkheda by judgment dated 17th July, 2005 in R.C.C. No.60 of 2005 convicting the applicant for offence punishable under section 353 of I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo R. I. for 3 months and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default of which to undergo further S.I. for 1 month, and confirmed by the judgment of the Appellate Court in Criminal Appeal No.95 of 2008, dated 23rd July, 2010. 3. At the out set, Shri Pawar, learned counsel for the applicant has urged before me that in the light of the evidence of the prosecution, the applicant does not wish to challenge his conviction on merits but the submission is restricted insofar as the sentence which is awarded to the applicant. Learned counsel fo...
Shree Sadguru Nagar Millennium Tower Chs Ltd. and Others Vs. Jagdish W ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-18-2013
Shri Narendra Kawde, Honble Member: 1. The Complainant No.1 Shree Sadguru Nagar Millennium Tower Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd., is the registered Co-operative Housing Society under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 and Complainant Nos.2 to 60 are the flat purchasers and members of the Complainant No.1 Society. The Opponent Mr.Jagdish Waman Rane, is the proprietor of Shree Sadguru Enterprises, who has completed construction of eight buildings named as Shree Sadguru Nagar (hereinafter called to as Opponent Builder Developer. The complaint has been filed by the Complainants alleging deficiency in service against the Opponent Builder Developer amongst other things for not obtaining Occupation Certificate in respect of disputed building no.8 and executed Deed of Conveyance in favour of the Society. 2. Complainants further aver that the builder developer handed over the possession of the flats between 6th July, 2004 to 14the April, 2005 without obtaining occupation certi...
Gadbad S/O Bhavdu Sonne Vs. Ramrao S/O Bhavdu Sonne
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-17-2013
U.D. Salvi, J. 1. This is a reference made by Jt. Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kannad under Section 113 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for seeking answers to the following questions: (A) Whether Civil Court can regularize encroachment over forest land by declaration of ownership in contravention and avoiding bar created by Section 2 of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980? (B) Whether Government Resolution dated 12.9.1979 is still good to regularise encroachment over forest land in contravention of Section 2 of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980? (C) Whether Civil Suit is maintainable to protect the encroachment over forest land in contravention of Section 2 of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980? 2. Genesis of this reference lies in Regular Civil Suit No. 153/2007 instituted by one Gadbad Bhavdu Sonne against his brother Ramrao Bhavdu Sonne in the Court of the Civil Judge, Junior Division at Kannad for the following relief: (1) Decree for perpetual injunction permanently restraining the defenda...
M/S. Ancl and Co. (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Corporation Bank and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-17-2013
By this Petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, petitioner seeks injunction against respondent nos. 2 to 4 from in any manner whatsoever from invoking the bank guarantees all dated 3rd September, 2012 bearing Nos. 2012/247 to 2012/255 being Exs. D to L to the petition. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this petition are setout hereinafter:- 2. Pursuant to the Letter of Intent dated 5th September, 2011 by respondent no.2 through respondent no.4, petitioner was engaged as a contractor to carry out civil/structural work and interior for the shell portion of the project described in the Letter of Intent. 3. On 23rd September, 2011, the 4th respondent issued a work order on behalf of the 2nd respondent for civil and structural work and common interior work for the shell portion of the said project for the total value of Rs. 19,32,86,971.85. 4. On 24th October, 2011, the petitioner was issued another work order for carrying out the work of...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »