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.
Smt Darshana Ganesh Kanavaje and Others Vs. Maharashtra State Road Tra ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-24-2013
1 Heard submissions at the Bar. The appeal is preferred against the Judgment and Award dated 6th May 2010 passed by Learned Chairman, Motor accident Claim Tribunal, Ratnagiri in MACP No.43 of 2008 whereby the Tribunal was pleased to award compensation in the sum of Rs 8,80,000/- only inclusive of no fault liability. The facts are:- 2 On 09-04-2008, Ganesh Manohar Kanavaje Aged 35 years was proceeding to his home at Lanja by Santro Car registration no. MH-08-C-6832, travelling with his friends. Shri Vijay Chavan was driving the car. S.T Bus bearing registration no. MH-12-CH-8684 came from the opposite direction while driven rashly, and negligently and dashed the said car. Ganesh died on the spot as result of the fatal accident. Tribunal held that accident happened as a result of sole negligence of the Driver of the offending S. T. Bus which had entered from the wrong side and gave dash to the car. Plea of contributory negligence raised on behalf of the MSRTC was found unacceptable and w...
Kashinath Trimbak Sane and Others Vs. Sau. Bharat Atmaram Suryawanshi ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-24-2013
P.C. : 1. This appeal takes exception to the judgment and order dated 3rd July 2008 passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Satara Region, Satara (Assistant Charity Commissioner) in Scheme Application No.22 of 2007 which was confirmed by the District Judge, Karad in Misc. Application (Trust) No.74 of 2011 on 30th November 2011. 2. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein i.e. original applicants filed Scheme Application No.22 of 2007 before the Assistant Charity Commissioner under section 50A(1) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act 1950 (the said Act) praying therein to frame and settle a scheme for better and efficient management of devasthan in question. It is the case of the appellants that, along with enquiry (scheme) application, respondent Nos.1 and 2 filed a draft scheme, consent letters of two proposed trustees appointed under the scheme, photocopies of handwritten proceedings of meeting dated 15th October 2007, list along with signatures of villagers who have attended the meeting, photo...
The Orienntal Insurance Co Ltd Vs. Abdul Rouf Mohmmed Memon and Anothe ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-24-2013
Dhanraj Khamatkar, Member: 1. This appeal takes an exception to an order dated 04/11/2010 passed by District Forum, South Mumbai in consumer complaint No.391/2006. 2. The facts leading to file this appeal can be summarized as under :- The complainant had purchased a vehicle bearing No.MH-04-BW-3549 by taking loan from the ICICI Bank. The complainant had taken insurance for said vehicle vide policy bearing No.112200/00031/2004/ 349 for a period 22/12/2003 to 21/12/2004. Said vehicle met with an accident at Kabbina Sevethu, Dist. Chikmanglur, State of Karnataka and accordingly, F.I.R. was registered. The complainant informed the incident to opponent No.1/Insurance Company on 14/05/2004 and filed insurance claim on 26/06/2004. As the complainant has not submitted papers as per requirements of the opponent No.1, the claim as filed was closed on 30/09/2004. Again, the complainant requested the opponent No.1/Insurance Company for reopening the file. The file was reopened and again, the file ...
Abasaheb S/O Balasaheb Varkhade and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtr ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-23-2013
A.I.S. Cheema, J. 1. Criminal Appeal No.677 of 2012 is by original accused Nos.1 and 2. Criminal Appeal No.82 of 2013 is by original accused Nos.4 and 5. These Appeals are against their conviction imposed by Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar vide Judgment dated 22nd November 2012, passed in Sessions Case No.128 of 2010. Criminal Application No.963 of 2013 is filed by the State against original accused Nos.2 to 12 seeking leave under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr. P.C.") against acquittal of original accused Nos.2 to 11 of Sections mentioned. Charge was framed in the trial Court against accused Nos.1 to 6 under Section 302 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "I.P.C."); against accused Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 under Section 201 read with 34 of I.P.C.; against accused Nos. 7 to 9 under Section 114 read with 302, read with 34 of I.P.C.; against accused Nos. 1, 3, 4, 10 to 12 under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act. The trial Court as per J...
Suresh S/O. Daduram Abnave Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2013
Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent. 2 The Appellant, original Plaintiff, being aggrieved by Order dated 6 May 2011, whereby his Notice of Motion and the Suit are dismissed for want of service of summons. 3 In the suit against the Respondents (Defendants), the Appellant had taken out Notice of Motion No.1334 of 2009 for a grant of necessary ad-interim relief. All the proceedings were duly served. Defendants had appeared through an Advocate. The appearance caused by the Defendants was not restricted to the Notice of Motion as the same was required to be considered as an appearance in the suit. Since the Defendants have duly appeared in the matter and had been served with the proceedings, there was no necessity for service of writ of summons again. The Sheriff report shows that all the necessary steps were taken for the purpose of service of writ of summons. However, the learned trial Judge dismissed the Notice of Motion and the Suit, for non service of writ of summons. ...
â¦.. Vs. the Chief Secretary, Government of Goa and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-23-2013
F.M. Reis, J. Heard Shri Y. V. Nadkarni, learned Amicus Curiae appointed by this Court and Shri A. N. S. Nadkarni, learned Advocate General, appearing on behalf of the Respondents. 2. The above Suo Moto Writ Petition was registered in view of a submission dated 19.07.2013 by the learned Registrar (Judicial) and Member Secretary of the Goa State Legal Services Authority. The issue raised is as under: Whether a claimant/s, as the case may be, whose claim petition/s is/are referred, to any one of the modes of settlement of dispute, as per Section 89 of CPC and settled amicably, by one of such mode, should be left high and dry in the matter of refund of fees paid as per Rule 278(i) of the Motor Vehicles Rules, 1991, for want of specific provisions under the said rule ? 3. On the basis of the said submission, this Court issued a notice to the Respondents vide Order dated 30.07.2013 and called upon them to file an affidavit with that regard. The stand of the State Government came to be state...
M/s. Mahavir Associates Vs. Anthony John D'Souza and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2013
Oral Judgment: The Appellants, in both these Appeals from Order, have challenged common order dated 11 February 2013, passed in Special Civil Suit No. 577 of 2010 filed by the Appellants for declaration and injunction and Special Civil Suit No. 628 of 2010 filed by the Respondents for a specific performance, declaration and cancellation of the instruments. The order is against the Appellant in both the matters. 2 The operative part of the impugned order is as under:- ORDER The application Exh. 5 in Spl.C.S.No.577/2010 is hereby rejected. The status-quo granted by this Court Dt.18/08/2010 is hereby vacated. The application Exh.5 in Spl.C.S. No. 628/2010 is hereby allowed. The defendants, their servants, agents etc. are hereby directed not to interfere in the occupation and possession of the suit property to the plaintiff till the decision of the suit. The defendants, their servants, agents etc. are hereby further directed not to alienate the suit property in any manner till the decision...
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/S. Hede Consultancy Company Pvt. ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-23-2013
F.M. Reis, J. Heard Ms. Asha Dessai, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant and Shri Y. V. Nadkarni, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent. 2. The above Appeal was admitted by this Court on 26.09.2006 on the following substantial question of law : Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was justified in holding that the transaction of transferring the shares of the group companies at low price causing long term capital loss and sale of shares of Mackhinon and Mackenzie Co. Ltd., at high price, making short term capital gains, thereby setting off the short term capital gains against the long term capital loss, is a colourable device to evade tax? 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the Respondent is a Company engaged in a business of Travel Agency and consultancy. On 02.12.1996, the Respondent filed the return of income declaring a total income of Rs.20,38,500/-. On 19.03.1999, the assessment was reopened under Section 147 of the Income Tax...
Tata Motors Ltd Vs. Anil Husen Satpute and Others
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2013
Dhanraj Khamatkar, Presiding Member: 1. This appeal takes an exception to an order dated 25/01/2008 passed by District Forum, Sangli in consumer complaint No.46/2006. 2. The facts leading to this appeal can be summarized as under:- The complainant had purchased a Tata Spacio vehicle from opponent No.1 by taking a loan from opponent No.2 for his personal use. The complainant had entered into a Hire-Purchase Agreement with opponent No.2. As per the hire-purchase agreement, E.M.I. of the loan amount was Rs.7,899/- and to be repaid in 47 installments. Accordingly, complainant had deposited 47 post-dated cheques. The opponent had sent a cheque of E.M.I. dated 03/01/2005 for clearance. The opponent had informed to the complainant by letter dated 03/02/2005 that the cheque has returned without clearance and hence, directed the complainant to pay the same within a period of seven days. It is the contention of the complainant that on that date, the complainant was having an amount of Rs.10,736/...
Mrs. Brigida De Souza Alias Brigida Miranda Vs. Julino De Souza
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-23-2013
F.M. Reis, J. Heard Shri Lobo, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant and Shri Lotlikar, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent. 2. The above Appeal challenges an Order and Decree dated 14.12.2004, whereby Matrimonial Petition filed by the Appellants came to be dismissed as no cause of action survived for the Appellants. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case as stated by the Appellant is that she got married to the Respondent on 05.01.1994 and after her marriage was registered at the Civil Registration Office at Ilhas, Panaji, the Respondent forced the Appellant to leave her job stating that he was worth over crores of Rupees. The religious marriage took place on 14.05.1994 at the Church of Immaculate Conception at Panaji and after the marriage, both started residing at the ancestral house of the Respondent at Grant Road at Mumbai. Thereafter, they shifted to their own flat at Mahim in Mumbai. It is the contention of the Appellant that the Respondent started harassing the Appell...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »