Mumbai Court February 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.
Al Ashraf Kably and Another Vs. Al Farrok Kably and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
Oral Order: 1. Rule. Made returnable forthwith. 2. The Petitioners are the two sons of Respondent No.1. They have challenged the order of the Judge, Family Court, Mumbai passed on 13th September, 2012 granting maintenance of Rs.15,000/- p.m. to Respondent No.1 under Section 125 of the CrPC. They are foreign nationals. The Petitioner No.1 is settled in the USA at least since 2009 and carries an American passport. The Petitioner No.2 is settled in Canada and carries a Canadian passport since July, 2012. He is at present on deputation in Jordan. 3. The application was made by Respondent No.1 u/s.125 (1) (d) of the CrPC which runs thus: 125. Order for maintenance of wives, children and parents. (1) If any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain. (a) .. (b) .. (c) .. (d) his father or mother, unable to maintain himself or herself, a Magistrate of the first class may, upon proof of such neglect or refusal, order such person to make a monthly allowance for the maintena...
Deccan Chronicle Holdings Ltd. and Another Vs. Aviotech Pvt. Ltd. and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. Mentioned. Not on Board. Taken on Board. 2. By an order dated 23rd August 2012, this Court (Coram: Smt. R.S. Dalvi, J.) granted Leave under Clause XII of the Letters Patent Act, 1866 to the Plaintiff, to file the above suit before this Court. The Defendant No.5 Deccan Chronicle Holdings Limited has now taken out the above Chamber summons praying that the said leave granted on 23rd August 2012 be revoked. 3. Briefly set out, the relevant facts are as under: 4. The Plaintiff is a Company duly incorporated and registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its Registered Office at Mumbai. The Plaintiff inter alia renders financial services including providing short term loans to its customers. The Defendant No. 1 is a Private Limited Company and a subsidiary of Defendant No.5. Defendant No.1 inter alia carries on the business of air transport services and chartered aviation services. The Defendant No. 1 had availed of certain short term facilities from Defendant N...
Pil Industries Limited Vs. Deccan Chronicle Holdings Ltd. and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
Oral Judgment: Mentioned. Not on Board. Taken on Board. 2. By an order dated 23rd August 2012, this Court (Coram: Smt. R.S. Dalvi, J.) granted Leave under Clause XII of the Letters Patent Act, 1866 to the Plaintiff, to file the above suit before this Court. The Defendant No.1 - Deccan Chronicle Holdings Limited - has now taken out the above Chamber summons praying that the said leave granted on 23rd August 2012 be revoked. 3. Briefly set out, the relevant facts are as under: 4. The Plaintiff is a Company duly incorporated and registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its Registered Office at Mumbai. The Plaintiff inter alia renders financial services including providing short term loans to its customers. The Defendant No.1 is a Listed Company, incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and having its Registered Office at Secunderabad, Andhra Pradesh. The Defendant No.1 interalia carries on business of publishing and distributing of news papers. The Defendant...
Smt. Vijaya Wd/O Suresh Kayarkar Vs. M.S.R.T.C. Through Divisional Con ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
P.C. Heard. By this petition, the petitioner impugns an order passed by the Industrial Court on 20.4.2012, allowing the revision filed by the respondent Corporation and reversing the judgment passed by the Labour Court holding that the punishment inflicted upon the petitioner was shockingly disproportionate to the act of misconduct committed by the petitioner. 2. The petitioner was working as a conductor with the respondent Corporation. A charge of misappropriation of an amount of Rs.29/- was levelled against the petitioner. It was found by the Corporation after the bus was checked that one passenger was traveling from Chandrapur to Mul without ticket. The petitioner was held guilty in the departmental inquiry conducted against her. The charge of misappropriation was proved. After holding the departmental inquiry, the petitioner was dismissed from service. The petitioner challenged her termination in the Labour Court by filing a complaint under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition...
Prashant Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
Oral Judgment: Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned counsel for both the parties. Heard G.N.Khanzode, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.S.Doiphode, learned Addl. P.P. for respondents 1 to 3. 2. The externment order dated 30th August, 2012 passed by respondent no.2 directing the petitioner to remove himself from the territorial jurisdiction of Bhandara, Chandrapur and Gadchiroli Districts within two days from receipt of the impugned order, has been challenged in the present Writ Petition. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the externment order is mainly based on the pendency of prohibition cases against the petitioner. The petitioner had eleven prohibition cases on the date of proposal received from the police by respondent no.2. It is stated in the impugned order that during the period between April, 2011 and September, 2011 when the matter was under consideration of respondent no.2, the petitioner had committed an...
Nawalkishsor Oil Industries Vs. Maharashtra State Electricity Board
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
Oral Judgment: The Second Appeal is admitted on the following substantial question of law:- Whether the court could have awarded interest @ 18% per annum in absence of any agreement between the parties and without recording any reasons for granting it at that rate? 2. The appeal is heard finally at the stage of admission. 3. The respondent-Maharashtra State Electricity Board had instituted a suit for recovery of arrears of electricity bill against the appellant-defendant. The appellant had failed to file the written statement. The matter proceeded exparte against the appellant and the trial court decreed the suit on 24.1.2002 and directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.1,96,747/- to the respondent Board with interest @ 18% per annum. The appellant preferred a first appeal against the judgment and decree. According to the appellant, the trial court at Akola did not have jurisdiction to entertain and decide the suit filed by the Board. It was the case of the appellant that the appellan...
Raghunath Ramnath Zolekar and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
Oral Judgment: (A.H. Joshi, J.) 5th November, 2012. 1. We have heard all these appeals at length. Perused the record. All appeals are being decided by this common judgment. 2. First Information Report was registered, taking statement of prosecutrix as the foundation. In all 23 accused were named in commission of the various acts. After investigation, the charge sheet was filed. All accused including one absconding accused Ram Salve were charged for their collective act of conspiracy, abetment etc. in kidnapping the prosecutrix, a minor girl who was below 16 years of age for procuring and using her for prostitution and committing on her gang rape and related offences. All accused were charged for commission of offences under Sections 366A, 376, 376(2)(g) read with Sections 109, 114 and Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and for offence under Sections 3, 4, 5 and 7 of Immoral Trafic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (PITA for short). 3. Accused No.1 Sheela Bargal died during pendency of trial. Abs...
Sau. Geeta Bapurao Kapse Vs. Anil Vithalrao Kadu
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. The applicant was original complainant in Criminal (Summary) Complaint Case No.232 of 2009 decided by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Wardha. Non-applicant Anil Kadu was original accused No.2. Non-applicant and original accused No.1 Sanjay Varbhe were convicted by the learned Magistrate by his judgment and order dated 12th October, 2011. The said judgment and order was challenged by the non-applicant and original accused No.1 before the Sessions Court by filing two independent appeals. The non-applicant was appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 104 of 2011 and the original accused No.1 was appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 106 of 2011. Both the appeals were heard together. The appeal of the original accused No.1 was dismissed and appeal of non-applicant / original accused No.2 was allowed and the non-applicant was directed to be acquitted. 3. This is an application for condonation of delay in filing revision application against t...
Dr. Balasaheb Shivajirao Pawar Vs. the Registrar and Election Officer ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. This writ petition challenges the order dated 06/08/2012, passed by the respondent no.1, rejecting the petitioners nomination for contesting the election of senate of respondent no.2/University from Professors' Constituency of Aurangabad Region. 2. It is common ground that as per the provisions of Maharashtra University of Health Sciences Act, 1998, election to the Senate was due on 01/09/2012. As per Section 22A of The Maharashtra University of Health Sciences Act, 1998, the State is empowered to specify, in consultation with Chancellor, the eligibility conditions for being elected or nominated as Member of any authority of the University. The Medical Education and Drugs Department Act published rules regarding eligibility from the Professors Constituency to the Senate of the University. The criteria of eligibility is as under: 1. A Candidate shall possess Post Graduate Decree in Health Science. 2. He shall have minimum 3 years experience as an approved Professor and...
Digambar Son of Haribhau Pajgade Vs. Nikhil Wagle Editor, Ibn Lokmat N ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
Oral Judgment: [A.B. Chaudhari, J.] 1. This petition was filed by the petitioner Digambar Haribhau Pajgade on 31st August, 2012 with a prayer to punish the respondents under the Contempt of Courts Act, and along with the amended prayer to take suo motu action against them. The contention of the petitioner is that the respondent nos. 1 to 10 had shown telecast on New Channel IBN Lokmat, Mumbai, from 30th to 31st August, 2011. The telecast flashed reads thus:- In the matter of inquiry of the land of Jawaharlal Darda Education Society Trust, wherein Ex-Chief Minister Shri Ashok Chavan, M.P. Vijay Darda and Education Minister Mr. Rajendra Darda, is stayed. The High Court slapped the petitioner. High Court blamed the petitioner to have obtained the order from the Court of J.M.F.C., by keeping the Court in dark and submitting incorrect information to the Court. Respondent nos. 2 to 9 also published said false news deliberately in their newspapers without verifying the correctness thereof int...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »