Mumbai Court October 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.
Tasadduq HusaIn Qureshi and Another Vs. Asif Abdul Bashar Qureshi and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-2013
Oral Judgment: 1 The present Appeal from Order filed by the original Plaintiffs as the learned Judge, of City Civil Court, Mumbai by order dated 21 August 2013 on the ground of jurisdiction, returned the plaint under Order VII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) by holding that the Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit in view of specific provisions under Section 80 read with Section 50 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 (BPT Act). 2 The Plaintiffs-Appellants, persons interested, have filed the Suits for various reliefs stating it to be against the members/elected trustees of Respondent No.3-Trust. There is no averment in the plaint that they are holding any post and/or they are the office bearer of the Trust on the date of filing of the suit. 3 The learned Judge has considered the averments as made in the plaint and after analyzing it, discussed in paras 9 and 10 as under: 9. Plaintiffs in their suit came with the statements that subject matter of the suit lies wi...
Sudhakar S/O Trimbakrao Kalmegh Vs. Seth Bansidhar Dahigaonkar and Oth ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-04-2013
Oral Judgment: (Z.A. Haq, J.) 1. This Letters Patent Appeal arises out of the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the Writ Petition filed by the appellant employee and upholding the order passed by the School Tribunal by which the appeal filed by the appellant employee was dismissed. 2. The appellant was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the School administered by respondent no.1 Society, by the order dated 15th of July, 1994, on probation for the period of two years. According to the appellant, he continued in service till 7th of September, 1998 and his services were terminated orally w.e.f. 8th of September, 1998. The submission of the appellant is that he was appointed after following the prescribed procedure. 3. The appellant had filed Appeal No.136 of 1998 before the School Tribunal challenging the termination of his services. The Tribunal framed three issues as laid down by this Court in the case of Anna Manikrao Pethe..vs.. Presiding Officer, School Trib...
Nahidabano W/O. Ferozkhan Pathan Vs. Divisional Commissioner, Aurangab ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-04-2013
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. The challenge in present writ petition is to order dated 19.7.2013 passed by the Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad (Respondent 2 herein) invalidating caste claim of Petitioner and canceling her caste certificate as belonging to caste Momin recognized as OBC vide government resolution dated 13.10.1967 and at serial number 191 therein. The exercise to determine the correctness of the caste claim has been undertaken by the Respondent 2 Committee under the provisions of Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificates Act, 2000 (Act No. 23 of 2001 hereafter) and Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate...
Eknath S/O. Laxman Gaikwad Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-04-2013
1. The appeal is filed against judgment and order of Special Case No. 16/1995, which was pending in the Court of Special Judge, Aurangabad. By the decision dated 12.10.2000, the Trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant for offences punishable under section 7 and section 13 (1) (d) r/w. 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'P.C. Act' for short). Both the sides are heard. 2. The original complainant had complained to Fuse Call Center of M.S.E.B. in the first week of February 1995 that his meter of electricity was faulty. Accused/appellant Shri. Gaikwad and one Shri. Pardhi were working as Lineman, as public servant, in Fuse Call Center of M.S.E.B. They visited the residential place of the complainant to check the meter and after checking it, they expressed that the meter was burnt and so, there was need to replace the meter. These two Linemen informed the complainant that it was necessary for him to pay Rs. 400/- as the charges for rep...
Anil S/O Wamanrao Gawande Vs. Mahalaxmi Railway Karmachari Sahakari an ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-04-2013
1. Appellant is the original disputant before the Cooperative Court, Amravati whose dispute against the respondents was registered as R. A. M. Case No.198/1992 and is challenging the judgment and order made by the learned Single Judge of this Court dated 18.06.2002 in Writ Petition No.3916/2001 by which, it was held that the dispute filed by the appellant under section 91 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act (for short the 'MCS Act') was not maintainable. FACTS: 2. The appellant, being a member of the Cooperative Housing Society, filed a dispute before the Cooperative Court, Amravati stating therein that though he paid all the amounts to the society for getting a plot from the society, he was not being given the plot and the possession thereof despite his repeated demands and despite making of the payments due. The Society, however, cancelled his membership and issued a letter to that effect received by him on 22.11.1991 and that the membership was cancelled for false reason an...
Smt. Jaiwanti Narayan Kamat, (Since deceased) Through legal representa ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-04-2013
Heard Mrs. Agni, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners and Shri Valmiki Menezes, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents. 2. The above Petition, inter alia, seeks for a writ of certoriari or writ in the nature of certoriari to quash and set aside the Judgment and Order dated 13.05.2009 passed by the learned Administrative Tribunal and the Orders dated 05.01.2006 and 16.03.2004 passed by the learned Deputy Collector and S.D. O. Panaji, and the learned Joint Mamlatdar, Panaji. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case as stated by the Petitioners are that the Petitioners reside in a House no. E-119 situated at Goltim, Navelim, surveyed under no. 10/26 of which the Respondents are the owners/Bhatkars thereof. It is also the case of the Petitioners that in view of the consent obtained from the Respondents and due to deemed consent, they have been residing in the suit house since the year 1973 and, as such, on account of deemed consent, as no suit for eviction has been filed against t...
Dr. Eurico Da Silva and Others Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer an ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-04-2013
NareshH. Patil, J. These two appeals arise out of the judgment and award passed on 30/01/2003 by IIIrd Additional District Judge, South Goa, Margao in Land Acquisition Case No. 231 of 1994. They are being disposed of by this Common Judgment. 2. The claimant owned property bearing survey no.39/7 which was admeasuring 5000 square metres. Out of the said total area, land about 800 square metres was acquired in the year 1991 for laying down railway track. The notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short, 'L.A. Act') was issued on 08/08/1991 and the notification under Section 6 was issued on 6/11/1991. The Land Acquisition Officer passed award on 06/10/1993, wherein, the acquired land was awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 23/- per square metre. The record reveals that the compensation of the subject property was taken by applying urgency clause, in view of the provisions under Section 17 of the L.A. Act, on 09/07/1992. 3. The applicant preferred Reference under ...
Uchit Narayan Das Vs. Union of India Through Ministry of Finance, Depa ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-2013
Mrs. Leena Mehendale, Member (A). 1. This OA is filed on 29th April, 2011 by the applicant seeking the following reliefs against Departmental Enquiry and punishment. a) This Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to call for the records of the case from the Respondents and after examining the same quash and set aside the impugned order dated 06.01.2011 with all consequential benefits. b) This Hon'ble Tribunal may further be pleased to grant promotion to the Applicant to the post of Additional Commissioner of Customs and Excise w.e.f. 21.11.2001 when the Applicant's immediate Junior Shri S.C.Rohtagi was promoted with all consequential benefits. c) This Hon'ble Tribunal may further be pleased to direct the Respondents to pay to the Applicant interest @ 12% per annum on the amount of DCRG, Leave Encashment and Commutation of Pension w.e.f. 01.02.2005 till the date of payment of retirement benefits. 2. The charge against applicant was of being in receipt of bribe money as under : Shri...
Bhimsha Gangappa and Another Vs. Union of India Through the Secretary, ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-2013
Mrs. Chameli Majumdar, Member (J). 1. The applicant filed this Original Application challenging the action of the respondents in not giving him appointment on compassionate ground. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case, as stated by the applicant are that the applicant was working as Mail/Passenger Driver. The applicant was declared medically unfit for the post of Passenger Driver w.e.f. 01.11.1999 by the Medical Board. Thereafter, the applicant was declared medically decategorized on 06.01.2000. The applicant made his first representation dated 17.02.2000 for seeking voluntary retirement from service. He made another representation on 23.10.2000 seeking voluntary retirement and also requesting the respondents to consider his second son, i.e., Applicant No. 2, for appointment on compassionate ground. Since no reply was received from the respondents, the Applicant no. 1 made another representation dated 28.11.2000 praying for voluntary retirement. The applicant retired voluntarily w....
Shailaja S. Godbole and Others Vs. Disha Constructions and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-03-2013
Oral Judgment: (Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) These Appeals arise from a judgment of the Learned Single Judge dated 16 September 2013 in a Motion that was taken out by the First Respondent in a suit seeking enforcement of a redevelopment agreement. An overwhelming majority of the existing members of the co-operative society having acted in fulfillment of the agreement between the society and the developer and having vacated their premises to facilitate redevelopment, the Learned Single Judge issued the impugned directions in the suit of the developer. These directions are intended to ensure that the non-consenting members of the society (14 Appellants in the first appeal and 11 in the second ) do not obstruct the process of redevelopment. For convenience of reference the directions of the Learned Single Judge in the Motion are extracted herein below : (i) The Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay, is appointed Receiver in respect of the Suit Property; (ii) The Plaintiff Developer shall on or ...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »