Mumbai Court March 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.
Bandu Shankar Kadgaonkar Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
Smt. V.K. Tahilramani, J. This appeal is directed by the appellant-original accused against the Judgment and Order dated 22.08.2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gadhinglaj in Sessions Case No.1 of 2007. By the said Judgment and Order, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer Imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.5000/- i.d. R.I. for six months. 2. The prosecution case briefly stated, is as under: (i) The appellant was residing alongwith his son at village Madilage, Taluka-Ajara, District Kolhapur. Antu (deceased) alongwith his wife Muktabai, his sons Tanaji and Sanjay and daughter-in-law Jayashri was also residing in the very same village. The appellant was the friend of the deceased. Everyday in the morning both of them used to go to Chaloba forest to graze their cattle and they used to return at 5 p.m.. On the day of incident also the appellant came to the house of Antu and both of ...
Shivanand Damodar Shanbhag Vs. Smt. Sujata Shivanand Shanbhag
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
Oral Judgment:: [A.R. Joshi) 1. Both the appeals are preferred by the appellant-husband challenging the judgment and order passed on 30.12.2004 by the learned Judge of Family Court No.4, Mumbai at Bandra. The said impugned judgment and order was passed as a common judgment disposing off two petitions filed by the present respondent-wife. Hereinafter for the sake of clarity, present appellant is referred to as husband and present respondent is referred to as wife. 2. Respondent-wife had preferred Petition No.B63/ 2001 asking for declaration that she is entitled to possessory right over her matrimonial home situated at Flat No.15, 5th floor, Sawant Bhavan, 18/A, 76, Gokuldas Pasta Road, Dadar (E), Mumbai 400 014. She also prayed for permanent injunction restraining appellant-husband from obstructing and/or preventing her entry in the said matrimonial home / flat and also prayed for permanent injunction restraining her forcible dispossession from the said flat. Respondent-wife also filed...
Matoshri Ramabai Ambedkar Vidayarthi Vastigrah Trust Vs. State of Maha ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
Oral Judgment: (Mrs. Mridula Bhatkar, J.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. The petitioner is a Trust running Lodging and Boarding "Ashramshala" and Junior College for the poor and needy students from Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and VJNT students. The Trust gets grant from the State/respondent no.1 every year. 60% of the grants are given as advance prior to the commencement of every academic year in the month of May and 40% of the grant is disbursed in the month of December every year. In the Academic years 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 the respondent/State disbursed excess amount at the time of giving advance and therefore, the said excess amount was recovered by deducting the amount in installments from the grants of the subsequent years. The particulars in this regard from the secondary Ashramshala and from the Junior college Ashramshala are as follows:-Sr.No.YearExcess amountDeducted amount12007-20089,04,137 22008-200911,84,467 3200...
Ravindra Pralhadrao Khare Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
A.S. OKA, J. By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner has impugned the judgment and order dated 8th October 2012 passed by the Scheduled Tribes Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Konkan Division, Thane (hereinafter referred to as "the Scrutiny Committee"). The matter of verification of the caste claim of the Petitioner was referred to the Scrutiny Committee. The Petitioner claimed that he belongs to the caste "Thakur" which is a Scheduled Tribe. The Petitioner was employed with the Fire Brigade of the third Respondent - Municipal Corporation and the caste claim of the Petitioner was forwarded to the Scrutiny Committee for verification. Earlier, the caste claim of the Petitioner was invalidated by the Scrutiny Committee and, thereafter, a Writ Petition was filed by the Petitioner in which an order of remand was passed. The judgment and order has been passed after remand. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submitted that the Scrutiny C...
Dy. Chief Officer, Goa Industrial Development Corporation Vs. Jesus Al ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
Oral Judgment: This appeal arises out of judgment and award dated 30/08/2006 passed by the learned Adhoc Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court II, South Goa, Margao in Land Acquisition Case No. 85 of 2000. 2. Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the manner in which they appear in the cause title of the said Land Acquisition Case. 3. Vide notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ( the Act, for short) and published in the Official Gazette dated 05/10/1987, land was acquired for setting up an industrial estate at Verna Plateau. This included land bearing survey nos. 87/1 to 87/30 and 95/1 to 95/11, totally admeasuring 42,075 square metres, situated in Quelossim village of Mormugao taluka. By award dated 29/11/1994, the Land Acquisition Officer (L.A.O.) awarded different rates of compensation for various types of lands. The acquired land bearing survey nos. 87/1 to 87/6, 87/8 to 87/30, 95/1, 95/3 to 95/11, totally admeasuring 31,825 square metr...
Uttamrao Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
Appellant questions conviction in Sessions case No.95/2008, dated 19.8.2012, by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Aurangabad, for offense under Section 376(2)(f) of IPC, directing to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-; in default of payment of fine, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for six months, for Section 506 of IPC, rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-; in default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month, for Section 201 of IPC rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- with default clause to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. 2. The prosecutrix, aged 10 years, was studying in Vth Standard at village Shivrai. The appellant has a tailoring shop near her house. On 11.12.2007, parents of the prosecutrix had been to the field for agricultural work. While they were in field, Bhausaheb Gaikwad informed parents of prosecutrix sustaining bleeding injury to he...
Mrs. Teresa Rodrigues and Others Vs. State, Through the Deputy Collect ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Shri Nigel Da Costa Frias, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, Shri R. Menezes, learned Counsel appearing for respondents no.2 to 4 and Ms. S. Pai Kir, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent No.1. 2. The above petition seeks to quash and set aside by a writ or certiorari or any other writ in the nature of certiorari order or direction thereby quashing order dated 26/08/2009 passed by the learned Administrative Tribunal in Land Revenue Appeal No.51/2006. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the respondents preferred an appeal challenging the judgment passed by the learned Deputy Collector dated 22/06/2006 whereby the rival claims of the appellants and respondents were decided in respect of various survey numbers of the property situated in the village of Curca. 4. Respondents no.2 to 4 on the assumption that the impugned judgment passed by the learned Deputy Collector was passed in exercise of powers under Section 56 of the ...
Hari S/O Shankar Patil and Others Vs. the State of MaharashtrA. Throug ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
1) Heard extensively. Rule was issued on 20th June, 2007. By these applications, the applicants have questioned lodging of F.I.R. vide Cr.Nos.35/2006; 36/2006; and 34/2006, all dated 28.12.2006 before Taluka police station, Nandurbar. Shri Ratan Sajan Patil had executed sale-deed dated 17.6.2004 in favour of the applicant. Pursuant thereto, mutation entries were effected being entry Nos.475, 476, 477 and 479. The respondent No.5 belatedly moved the Respondent No.3, making allegation that the applicant has indulged in money-lending and that the sale-deed, executed by his grandfather, was, in fact, mortgage and not an outright sale. The purpose of sale-deed was, the same would be a conveyance in favour of grand-father of Respondent no.5. 2) Respondent No.3 issued a show cause notice to the applicant, asking to reply as to why action under the provisions of The Bombay Money-Lenders Act, 1946 (for short, the Act), should not be initiated. The applicant has denied of any transaction in the ...
M/S Guala Closures (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Regional P. F. Commissioner
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
Oral Judgment:- Heard Shri G. Sardessai, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri P. P. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. The above petition inter-alia seeks to quash and set aside the order passed by the Appellant Tribunal dated 24.08.2011 while disposing of appeal preferred by the petitioner challenging the order dated 03.11.2009 passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner. 3. During the course of the hearing of the above petition, Shri Sardesai, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner apart from raising contentions on merits of the dispute has pointed out that the Appellate Authority while disposing of the appeal preferred by the petitioner has not independently scrutinized the material on record to come to the conclusion that the trainees employed by the petitioner are to be treated as employees within the meaning of the Employees Provident Fund Act. The learned counsel has taken me through the impugned order and pointed out that apart...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Mohammad Amjad Ali Mohammad Yousuf Ali Nimtan ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard extensively. In Special Case (ACB) No.3/1990, the learned Special Judge (ACB), Nanded on 30th July, 2001, acquitted the respondent/accused of the offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) r/w Section 13(2) of The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The State has challenged the same. Leave was granted on 14th January, 2004. The appeal was admitted. 2. The prosecution case proceeds on the accusations that the respondent/accused, a Surveyor, a public servant, made illegal gratification of Rs.1,000/- for carrying measurement of property belonging to the complainant - Keshav. The amount was settled at Rs.600/-. The accused allegedly accepted the amount. 3. The matter has a piquant story. In the first round of litigation on the same accusations, PW No.1, the complainant - Keshav, supported the prosecution. The entire evidence was recorded and matter was kept for judgment. However, the Judgment could not be delivered, as the learned Judge was transferred. The Judgment...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »