Mumbai Court May 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.
Hemant Vs. Police Kalyan Shikshan Prasarak Mandal and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: May-02-2013
Oral Judgment: Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. The petitioner questions order dated 7th March 2013 below Exh.9/A in Appeal No.64/2012 passed by learned Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Solapur, whereby learned Presiding Officer was pleased to dismiss the appeal on preliminary point of jurisdiction 3. Facts, which are germane can briefly be stated thus: The petitioner had preferred appeal challenging the order dated 28.11.2012, whereby the petitioner was terminated from the post of Head Master by the respondent-school. The termination order was challenged on the ground of its legality. When the appeal came up before the learned Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Solapur, reference was made to the ruling in Komal Vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in 2011 (4) Mh.L.J. 301, while preliminary issue was framed regarding jurisdiction of the Tribunal to entertain the appeal. 4...
Prabhakar Xembu Bhandari and Another Vs. the State of Goa, Through Its ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: May-02-2013
Rule. Made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties the petition is taken on board for final hearing. 2. The petitioners are the plaintiffs in Civil Suit No.78/2011 wherein they had filed an application for amendment of the plaint. That application was rejected by the trial court vide its order dated 7th January, 2013. The present petition is directed against that order. 3. In their suit the petitioners have sought five permanent reliefs out of which three are for declarations and others for permanent injunctions. The first declaration sought is that the petitioners have an easementary right of access over survey no.26/2 which is being objected to by respondents no.10 and 11, its present owners. The second declaration sought is that the land at survey no.26/2 consists of hilly area with a steep slope and not within the permissible gradient for development and that Divzam Fator Sati Shila stones cannot be permitted to be destroyed, since they are of sentimental value and historical i...
Sakharam Chimaji Ujghare and Another Vs. Special Recovery Officer and ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: May-02-2013
Oral Judgment: Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, taken up for final hearing. 2. The Recovery Certificate is issued against the petitioners. The respondent No.1 - Credit Society auctioned the property of the petitioners on 18/05/2012. The present respondent No.3 is the auction purchaser. The auction purchaser deposited the earnest amount on 18/05/2012 and the remaining amount on 01/06/2012. The Manager of the respondent No.1 - Credit Society executed sale deed in favour of respondent No.3 on 01/06/2012. The petitioner assails the said auction proceedings. 3. Mr. Pawar, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by 31/05/2012, the petitioners have deposited an amount of more than Rs.9,00,000/- (Rupees Nine Lacs only). Still the sale deed was executed on 01/06/2012 for an amount of Rs.8,51,000/- (Rupees Eight Lacs Fifty One Thousand only ). The learned counsel submits that the sale which was effectuated was n...
Smt. Iris D'Mello Alias Iris D'Mello Travasso Others Vs. State of Goa, ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: May-02-2013
U.V. Bakre, J. Heard Mr. Shivan Dessai and Mr. Sudin Usgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Mr. A.N.S. Nadkarni, learned Advocate General, appearing for respondents no. 1 to 4 in Writ Petition No. 555/2009 and for respondents no. 1 to 3 in other Writ Petitions and Mrs. Norma Alvares on behalf of Goa Foundation. 2. Rule in Writ Petition No. 774/2011. Learned Counsel for the respective respondents waive service of notice. Writ Petition No. 774/2011 is heard forthwith, with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, along with other petitions, wherein Rule was already issued earlier. 3. By these Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the non-grant of NOC by respondent no. 3 to the applications made by the petitioners in each case, for conversion of land from agricultural to non-agricultural purposes under Section 32(1) of the Goa, Daman and Diu Land Revenue Code, 1968. (the Code, for short). The...
Khan Hasib Ibrahim Vs. Suresh Haribhau Kapare and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: May-02-2013
Oral Judgment: Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties, heard for final disposal. 2. The present proceeding is filed to challenge the order made by JMFC, Ahmednagar to police to make investigation of the case u/s 156(3) of Cr.P.C. On the basis of this order, C.R.No.M-10/2007 is registered in Topkhana police station, Ahmednagar for offences punishable u/s 392, 395 and 34 of IPC. 3. The petitioner is branch manager of Shriram Transport Finance Company Ltd. Ahmednagar. The brother of respondent no.1 had taken finance from Shriram Transport Finance Company Ltd. Branch Ahmednagar for purchasing 2 trucks. The two trucks were purchased and hypothecation agreement was signed by said brother of respondent no.1. In the agreement, the finance company had the power to repossess the vehicle in case default was committed by borrower in making payment of instalments of loan. There was also arbitration clause in the agreement. As the default was committed, steps were taken by the f...
Regional Director, E.S.i. Corporation Vs. Farmacia Ananta
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: May-02-2013
This appeal preferred by the Regional Director, E.S.I. Corporation was admitted on the following substantial questions of law: (A) Whether the coolies/hamalies engaged for loading and unloading goods of the respondent in connection with their business are covered within the scope of the term employee as defined under Section 2(9) of the employee's State Insurance Act and whether the ratio as laid down by the Bombay High Court in the Parle Bottling case would not be binding ratio in view of the Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Rajkumar Transport and South India Flour Mills case. Whether the ratio laid down by the A.P. Court in E.I.D. Parry case is per incurium considering the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme court in Rajkamal case? (B) Whether the E.I. Court has ignored and by passed the basic norm governing coverage of the establishment and the definition of employee as contained in Section 2(9) of the E.I. Act and the relevant test that if the hamalies/coolies casual em...
Alkabai Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: May-02-2013
Oral Judgment: (Naresh H. Patil, J.) Shri. Godsay, learned counsel appearing for the Applicants, on instructions, submits that charge-sheet has been filed in respect of the subject crime. The learned counsel further submits that liberty be granted to raise appropriate challenge in view of filing of the chargesheet. 2. We have perused the complaint and considered the submissions advanced. We have also perused the order passed by the learned Single Judge on 12th March, 2009. 3. The Applicants are at liberty to raise appropriate challenge to the charge-sheet filed by the police, in accordance with law. We direct that no coercive action be taken against the Applicants till 21st June, 2013. The proceedings initiated on the complaint filed against the Applicants on 21st March 2008, being Crime No.36 of 2008, registered with Police Station, Dharangaon, Dist-Jalgaon, shall stand stayed till 21st June, 2013. All issues are kept open. 4. Rule is made absolute on the terms indicated above....
Mrs. Kala Vs. Union of India Through the Department of Post and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-01-2013
(Oral) A.K. Basheer, Member (J) Applicant has retired from service on September 30, 2011 while she was working as Senior Accountant in the Department of Posts. She has filed this Original Application with a prayer to quash and set aide the Memorandum of charge issued to her by respondent No.3 directing her to face a Departmental Inquiry on the charges indicated therein. 2. Gravamen of the charge in the Memorandum dated September 22, 2011 is that applicant had produced a Caste Certificate obtained from Executive Magistrate,Nagpur claiming to belong to Halba community which is a Scheduled Tribe. She was given appointment in 1984 as Lower Division Clerk against a post reserved for a Scheduled Tribe candidate on the basis of the said Caste Certificate. Even though, by communication dated July 17, 2001 the applicant was directed to produce the Original Caste Certificate and other relevant documents required for the purpose of submission before the Caste Scrutiny Committee, she had failed to...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›