Mumbai Court April 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.
Jayesh Nagindas Doshi Vs. Ashapura Aluminium Ltd. and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
PC: 1. Admit. Learned counsel for the Respondent waives service. The appeal is taken up for hearing and final disposal, by consent and on the request of the learned counsel. 2. The appeal has been preferred by the First Defendant against an order of the learned Single Judge on a Summons for Judgment taken out in a summary suit under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. By the impugned judgment, the Appellant has been granted leave to defend the suit conditional on a deposit of an amount of Rs.50.00 lakhs within a period of eight weeks. The Summons for Judgment has been made absolute against the Second and Third Defendants who have not entered appearance despite service of the summons. Since the appeal is only by the First Defendant, this order is confined to the correctness of the order of the learned Single Judge insofar as the Appellant was granted conditional leave to defend. 3. The suit has been instituted for the recovery of an amount of Rs.81.33 lakhs together with ...
Adai Mehra Production Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Sumeet P. Mehra and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
1. By this petition filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short herein after referred as Arbitration Act 1996), petitioner seeks to challenge an order dated 16th July 2012 passed by the learned arbitrator granting interim measures in favour of the respondents under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act 1996. Some of relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this petition are as under. 2. Some time in the year 1973, the sole proprietary concern of Mr Prakash Mehra i e. Prakash Mehra Production (for short PMP) produced a film ''Zanjeer''. The respondents herein and Mr Amit Mehra are the sons of late Mr Prakash Mehra. 3. On 24th August 2011, the petitioner entered into a Coproduction Agreement for remake of the said film 'Zanjeer' with Flying Turtle Films (FTF) and started working on the script of the remake. In the recitals at page 22 of the said agreement entered into between the petitioner and M/s FTF, it was recorded that the petitioner had represented...
Anil Dattatraya Kulkarni Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
Oral Judgment: (V.M. Kanade, J.) 1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service. By consent of parties Petition is taken up for final hearing. 2. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the State. 3. By this Petition which is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner is challenging the validity of Rule 2(3)(Seven) of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Medical Attendance) Rules 1961 and the G.R./Circular dated 11/11/2011 being oS[ki and 2011@ Ikz- dz- 333@11 @ jkdkfoand2 as ultra virus to the said Rules and the provisions of the Constitution of India, 1950. The Petitioner is further seeking an appropriate writ, order and direction for quashing and setting aside the decision / letter dated 30/1/2011 passed by Respondent No.2 and also for setting aside the order and decision dated 27/2/2012 taken by the Respondents and communicated to the Petitioner by the Distr...
Naresh Gangaram Gosavi and Others Vs. Chembur English School and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
Chief Justice The petitions raise interesting questions about liability of the State to reimburse fees for elementary and secondary education to children belonging to backward classes and weaker sections of the society. 2. Petitioner Nos.1 to 5 in Public Interest Litigation No. 26 of 2011 are citizens belonging to Scheduled Castes, Vimukta Jati and Nomadic Tribes and Special Backward Classes. Their wards are studying in various private unaided schools in the city of Mumbai and were receiving free ships/scholarships provided by the Department of Social Welfare, State of Maharashtra till 2008-09. Petitioner No.6 is the Association of Parents from Scheduled Castes, Vimukt Jati and Nomadic Tribes. 3. The petitioners have prayed for directions to the State Government to ensure that the schools, where students belonging to the above categories (hereinafter referred to as the specified backward classes) study, do not prevent them from attending schools and participating in school activities d...
Bestech Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. and Others Vs. Assistant Commissioner, Z ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. Admit. Heard the matter finally by consent of the learned Counsels appearing for the parties. 2. The challenge in this civil revision application is to the order dated 14-12-2011 passed by the learned District Judge-4, Nagpur in Misc. Civil Appeal No.269 of 2010. The Petition also challenges the order dated 22-7-2010 passed by the Objection Officer, Dhantoli Zone No.4, Nagpur Municipal Corporation, Nagpur, rejecting the objection to the notice dated 26-3-2008 demanding the property tax for the period from 1-4-2003 to 1-4-2007. 3. The objection raised by the applicants was that no assessment could have been done with retrospective effect for the period from 1-4-2003 to 1-4-2007. This objection is rejected by the Objection Officer holding that the power to make the assessment with retrospective effect is conferred under Section 134(3) of the City of Nagpur Corporation Act,1948 [for short, the said Act] read with Rule 13(iii) of the Property Tax Bye-laws. It is held that...
Bhaskar and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
Oral Judgment: (R.C. Chavan, J.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties finally by consent. 2. By this application, the applicants/Directors of Shri Gajanan Urban Cooperative Credit Society seek that F.I.R. registered with Khamgaon City Police Station on 17.6.2011 bearing Crime No.86/11 for offence punishable under Sections 406, 408, 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code be quashed. The offence came to be registered against the Directors and members of the staff of the society on the allegation that huge amounts were disbursed to the debtors without taking adequate security. It was alleged that the Directors and employees of the Society did not take steps to recover the amounts due. It seems that the District Deputy Registrar of the Cooperative Society had directed an enquiry under Section 88 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 and had appointed Advocate Mr. Vijay Pawar as an Enquiry Officer. From the reply of respondent n...
Smt. Ashwini Balu Bunge Vs. Divisional Manager Life Insurance Corporat ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
S.B. Sawarkar, Member 1. This appeal takes an exception to an order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Solapur (for brevity herein after referred as District Forum) in consumer complaint no.CC/06/362 on 18/01/2007. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant/original complainants husband (for brevity called as deceased life assured had taken a Jivan Mitra (Triple Cover Endowment) policy bearing no.954251520 effective from 10/03/2004. Facility in the policy was that if the insured died of a natural death, he would receive triple the value of the policy and if died of an accident, would receive 4 times the assured value. Policy duration was from 10/03/2004 to 10/03/2024. 3. The deceased life assured was admitted to Jehangir hospital at Pune from 05/07/2005 to 12/07/2005 and died on 25/07/2005 of Acute Chronic Renal failure in Ruby Hall Clinic when the policy was operative. Complainant then raised the claim of insurance which was reputed by the respondent/orig...
Vishnu Vs. Sow. Adhika
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
Heard extensively. Rule was issued on 3rd December, 2003. 2. Respondent - Sow. Adhika filed maintenance proceedings under Section 125 Code of Criminal Procedure, vide application No.171/1993, and maintenance of Rs.200/- p.m. was granted to her. Said order was questioned in Criminal Revision Application No.86/1996 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge at Osmanabad. The revision was allowed. The matter was remanded for fresh trial to the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class. It was dismissed on 8th March, 2001. The respondent feeling aggrieved by the said judgment, challenged it in revision before Court of Sessions at Osmanabad being Criminal Revision No.173/2001, wherein maintenance @ Rs.250/- p.m. was granted to the respondent. Same is questioned by the petitioner - Vishnu. 3. The ground of challenge is-, a) without any authority, learned Additional Sessions Judge extended monetary benefit of maintenance oblivious to the fact that Regular Civil Suit No.10/1995 was decreed on ...
The Municipal Council Jintur Vs. Shri Sunder Namdeo Khillare and Other ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
1. Since, common issue is involved in all these writ petitions, the same are being disposed of by this common order. 2. These writ petitions take exception to the judgment and order dated 20.10.2010 thereby allowing the complaints filed by the present respondents - original complainants and declaring that the respondent therein present petitioner has engaged in and has been engaging in unfair labour practices under Item 5 and 6 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short, referred to as the said Act), and directing the petitioner herein to cease and desist from engaging in such unfair labour practices. The petitioner herein was further directed to regularize the services of the complainants from the date of the order and to give them all consequential monetary benefits within two months from the said order. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner Municipal Council was resp...
Radio One Limited (Formerly Known as Radio Mid-day (West) India Ltd. a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
Oral Judgment: (Dr. Chandrachud, J.) The appeal before the Court arises from an order of a learned Single Judge dated 9 May 2012. The appeal is by the original Defendant. The Plaintiff has filed cross-objections. For convenience of reference, it would be appropriate to refer to the parties by their appellations in the suit. 2. In 2011, Radio One Limited, the Defendant, secured a licence for an FM Radio station in Mumbai. The Plaintiff, Phonographic Performance Ltd., apprehending that the Defendant would exploit the sound recordings in the repertoire of the Plaintiff filed a suit (Suit No.3752 of 2001)for an injunction which is pending on the Original Side of this Court. A Notice of Motion (Notice of Motion No.2846 of 2003)was filed in the suit. 3. On 1 March 2002, citing the tariff of the Plaintiff as excessive, the Defendant approached the Copyright Board for grant of a compulsory licence under Section 31(1)(b) of the Copyright Act, 1957. The Copyright Board disposed of the complaint ...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »