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.
Aditya Yadav Vs. State and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: May-07-2013
By this common order five criminal revision applications filed by the same petitioner are being disposed of. The petitioner challenges the orders passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mapusa that charge be framed against him for the offence punishable under Section 489-B Indian Penal Code in each of the Sessions Case i.e. Sessions Case No.38/2011, 40/2011, 35/2011, 37/2011 and 46/2011. 2. The particulars of the five sessions cases are as follows:(chart)Sr.no.Criminal Revision ApplicationsSessions CaseComplaintFIR No.No. of notesCharge framed u/s 489-B IPC in respect of137/201238/20113/6/2010. By Manager ICICI Bank for counterfeit notes found during period March May 2010 in ICICI Bank, Calangute Branch.122/201075DA 678592 of Rs.500/-238/201240/201113/1/2011. By Manager ICICI Bank for counterfeit notes found during period October 2010 13.1.2011 in ICICI Bank, Calangute Branch'11/2011127AS 875664 of Rs.500/-339/201235/201130/6/2011. By Manager ICICI Bank for counterfeit notes found du...
Kirtikumar Kashinath Chorghe Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-06-2013
P.C. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for State. 2. This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The applicant herein is arrested in Crime No.514 of 2012 registered at Virar Police Station. The applicant has been charge-sheeted for offence punishable under Section 376, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code. On 24th December, 2012 Rajeshree Narkar had lodged a report at Virar Police Station alleging therein that while she was working as an Estate Agent at Virar, she met with the applicant. She was acquainted with the applicant. He has started visiting her house quite often. He has solicited sexual favour from the applicant on several occasions. Initially the complainant had refused the same. Thereafter the applicant had ravished her. She was scared of humiliation in the society and therefore had not complained about it to anyone. According to her, the applicant had committed sexual intercourse with her on several occasion...
St. Mary's High School (SSC Section), Through Its Head Master and Anot ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-06-2013
Oral Judgment: [S.J. Vazifdar, J.] 1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By an order dated 7th March, 2013, the parties were put to notice that the matter would be heard finally at the admission stage. We, accordingly, proceed to hear the matter finally. 2. Respondent No.2 is the Director of Education. Respondent No.3 is the Accountant General. The petitioners have sought an order setting aside two directions in an order dated 28th February, 2012, passed by respondent No.2 Director of Education. The first direction is to refund a sum of Rs.145.71 crores. The second is to make available the required toilets within six months on all floors of the school building. The petitioners had also challenged certain remarks in the third respondent's inspection report. This challenge, however, was on the presumption that the same were findings of the third respondent as contended by respondent Nos.1 and 2. Respondent No.3 the Accountant General has filed an affidavit in this Court, clarifyi...
Sadashiv Krishna Sutar Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-06-2013
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, by consent. 2. Mrs. Mane, learned A.P.P., waives service on behalf of the Respondent-State. 3. A short question is raised in this Criminal Revision Application, which is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 24th July, 2012 of the Special Judge, Greater Bombay. This Judgment and Order was delivered on an application made by the present Applicant/Original Accused for discharge in Special Case No.45 of 2011. 4. The question raised for my consideration is whether the Applicant, who has been appointed as a Manager by the Liquidator of M/s. Indira Co-operative Bank Limited, is a Public Servant within the meaning of the said term, as defined in the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, (for short the P.C. Act). 5. The undisputed factual position is that M/s. Indira Co-operative Bank Limited is under liquidation. In the year 1998, the District Registrar in exercise of his powers under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 has appointed...
Dr. Bela Hitesh Bhatt Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-06-2013
P.C. : 1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard finally. By an order dated 21st March, 2013, the parties were put to notice that the matter may be disposed of finally at the admission stage itself. We, accordingly, heard the petition finally. 2. The petitioner, who has presented the petition and appeared in person, seeks an order to quash and set aside the action of respondent No.4, the Appropriate Authority and Medical Officer under the Preconception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994, sealing her sonography machine on 6th February, 2013. 3. As the petitioner appears in person, we requested Mr. Amit K. Desai, a senior counsel to appear as amicus curiae. We must, at the outset, express our appreciation for the valuable assistance rendered by him so willingly. 4. The petitioner finds herself in a most unfortunate situation for no fault of her own. The only allegation against the petitioner is that the application for renewal of her r...
Lufeng Shipping Co. Ltd. and Another Vs. M.V. Rainbow Ace and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-06-2013
1. The present Notice of Motion is taken out by the Applicant Rainbow Ace Shipping S.A. Panama, Owner of Defendant No.1 Vessel M.V. Rainbow Ace for setting aside the order of arrest of Defendant No. 1 vessel dated 28th January, 2013. 2. The claim of the Plaintiff Lufeng Shipping Co. Ltd. in the above suit arises out of an Agreement entered into by the Plaintiff as owners of the vessel M.V. J. Tong with Defendant No.2 Whim Star Chartering Co. Ltd., Hongkong, as charterers for the use or hire of the vessel for carriage of goods. Therefore the Plaintiffs claim is a maritime claim against the Defendant No.2 arising out of a voyage charter-party evidenced by a Fixture Note dated 6th April 2011, which is annexed as Exhibit-A to the Plaint. The Plaintiffs claim is for damages and losses purportedly suffered by it as a result of detention of its vessel at the port of loading as set out in paragraphs 4 to 9 of the Plaint. As per the particulars of the claim, the claim amount is US$ 1,68,658.0...
Pishu Mulchand Mahtani and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-06-2013
1 Rule. 2 The Respondents waive service. 3 By consent, Rule made returnable forthwith. 4 By this Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India r/w Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Petitioners are challenging the order dated 14.12.2012 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 41st Court, Shindewadi, Dadar (East), Mumbai-14 in Case No.4100087/SW/2012 whereby he issued the process for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1), 3(3), 3(4) r/w 36 of the Maharashtra Fire Prevention and Life Safety Measures Act, 2006 (for short the said Act). This process was issued on a complaint which was lodged by the Respondent No.2 /Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai. 5 The complaint alleges that on 02.12.2012 at about 3:33 a.m., the officer concerned of Watch Room of Colaba Fire Station received a message from the Control Room to attend the Fire Call at Jolly Maker-I Cooperative Housing Society as fire broke out therein. The officer concerned had atte...
Deelip S/O Vishwanath Patil and Another Vs. the Special Land Acquisiti ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: May-06-2013
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the parties. 2. The Writ Petition Nos. 8377, 8379, 8392 and 8395 of 2012 take exception to the impugned orders dated 30th April, 2009 passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon below Exhibit-1 in Regular Darkhast Nos. 497 of 2008 arising out of L.A.R. No. 147 of 2006, R.D. No. 494 of 2008 arising out of L.A.R. No. 140 of 2006, R.D. No. 159 of 2009 arising out of L.A.R. No.146 of 2006 and R.D. No. 410 of 2008 arising out of L.A.R. No. 141 of 2006 respectively. 3. It is the case of the petitioners that, the petitioner in W.P. No. 8377 of 2012 is the owner of land Gat No. 11/2/3 admeasuring 1 Hector 0 Are, petitioner in W.P. No. 8379 of 2012 is the owner of land Gat No. 11/2/1 admeasuring 3 Hector 92 Are, Gat No. 113/B admeasuring 2 Hector 15 Are, and land Gat No.113/A admeasuring 1 Hector 33 Are and potkharaba 0.02, the petitioner in W.P. No. 8392 of 2012 is the owner of land Gat No. 11/2/4 admeasuring...
Narayan Ram Shet Shirodkar Vs. Dr. Rajiv Fondu Gude
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: May-06-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. Appellant has filed this second appeal challenging the judgment and order passed by the Additional District Judge in Regular Civil Appeal No.85 of 2002 dated 03/05/2003. By the said judgment and order, the learned Additional District Judge, Panaji was pleased to allow the appeal and the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Ponda in Regular civil Suit No.81/99/B was set aside. 2. Brief facts are as under:- 3. Respondent No.1 is the original Plaintiff who instituted a suit in the Court of Civil Judge, Ponda, Goa against the Appellant/original Defendant for restoration of possession and recovery of mesne profit. For the sake of convenience, parties shall be referred to as Plaintiff and Defendant. 4. The dispute was in respect of a structure in the property bearing Hissa No.1088 in Village Panchayat of Shiroda. The case of the Plaintiff is that his grandfather Rudraji Sinai Gude was, during his life time, running a shop in the suit structure LOJ...
Zenito Vincent Cardozo Vs. District Magistrate, North Goa and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: May-06-2013
Oral Order: (A.P. Lavande, J.) Heard Mr. Desai, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Rivonkar, learned Public Prosecutor for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Mr. C.A. Ferreira, learned Assistant Solicitor General for respondent no.4. 2. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 13.02.2013 passed by respondent no.1 in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 ("the Act" for short). By virtue of the said order, the petitioner has been detained and kept in central jail, Aguada in order to prevent the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. In the petition several grounds have been urged in support of the petition. The petitioner also sought for interim relief by way of release on such terms and conditions as this Court deem it fit and proper. An affidavit in reply has been filed on behalf of the Under Secretary (Home) and an affidavit in reply has been filed on behalf o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »