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.
Naresh Balaji Kolhe Vs. Smt. Shakuntala
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-06-2013
Oral Judgment: RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. By this petition, the petitioner impugns an order passed by the trial Court on 04.12.2012 allowing an application filed by the respondent for amendment of the written statement with a view to file a counter claim. 2. The petitioner is the original plaintiff. A suit was filed by the petitioner for a decree of specific performance of contract. It was the case of the petitioner that the defendant-respondent had failed to execute the sale-deed in favour of the petitioner. The respondent filed the written statement on 24.06.2011 and denied the claim of the petitioner. On 02.07.2012, during the pendency of the suit, the respondent filed an application for amendment of the written statement with a view to file the counter claim. By the proposed amendment, the respondent wanted to seek a decree of perpetual injunction against the petitioner restraining the...
Rahematulla Haji Abdul Latif Vs. Yuvraj and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: May-06-2013
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the parties. 2. This Civil Revision Application takes exception to the order dated 15th October, 2012 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dhule below Exhibit-19 in Election Petition No. 03 of 2008. 3. The revision applicant herein, is the original respondent No. 2 in Election Petition filed by the present respondent No.1 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dhule under section 16 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 (for short, "said Act"), challenging the election of the revision applicant herein, from Ward No. 64 of the Municipal Corporation, Dhule. The said election was held in the year 2008. 4. It is the case of the respondent No.1 herein,in the Election Petition No. 03 of 2008 that, the election for electing the Councilors for Dhule Municipal Corporation was held on 30th November, 2008 and the results were declared on 1st December, 2008. In all 1704 voters exercised the...
Aditi Ajay Chaudhary Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-03-2013
P.C. The applicant is a woman accused and she has been taken in custody in pursuance of a C.R. which has been registered with the Agripada Police Station being C.R. No.33 of 2013 for alleged offences punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. The applicant has been arrested on 25th March 2013. 2. The allegations are that she along with her brother - original accused No.1 have lured several persons into parting with money under the garb of running either a lottery or assuring them jobs or employment in other sectors. The applicant has been arrested because it is alleged that several sums were also parted with and collected by her. 3. After hearing the learned Advocate for the applicant and Ms.Sonavane, APP appearing on behalf of the State, I am of the opinion that for the reasons set out in the application and by imposing stringent conditions, the applicant can be enlarged on bail. The applicant has a spastic child and equally she herself is unwell. There ar...
The Maharashtra Small Scale Industries Development Corporation Limited ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-03-2013
1. By this Arbitration Petition, the Petitioner seeks challenge the Award of the sole Arbitrator dated 30 June, 2003. By the impugned Award, the Arbitrator has directed the Petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.78,19,540.13 along with interest. 2. The Petitioner the Maharashtra Small Scale Industrial Development Corporation is a Corporation set up for the purpose of promoting small scale industries in the State of Maharashtra. The Respondent is a private limited company engaged in the business of manufacturing MS Pipes and related products. It is a small scale industrial unit. 3. The dispute between the parties, which was referred to arbitration, is regarding the interest on delayed payment made by the Respondent to the Petitioner. 4. Before proceeding with narration of the facts of the present case, it will be useful to advert to the developments as regards statutory provisions that govern the dispute. The relevant statue is The Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary In...
Wazir Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Birla Cotsyn (India) Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-03-2013
Oral Judgment: The Plaintiffs have in the above Summons for Judgment prayed that the judgment may be entered in favour of the Plaintiffs in the above Suit against the Defendants for Rs. 3,11,17,808.21 with further interest on Rs. 3,00,00,000/- from 26th November, 2012, at the rate of 16 per cent or such other rate as this Court may deem fit and proper till payment or realization of decretal sum and for costs. 2. According to the Plaintiffs, at the request of the Defendants, the Plaintiffs provided to the Defendants with Inter Corporate Deposit ("I.C.D.") for a sum of Rs. 3,00,00,000/- on 6th March, 2012, on the terms as mentioned in the letter dated 6th March, 2012, issued by the Defendants to the Plaintiffs. The Defendants had also created lien in favour of the Plaintiffs, the lien being 69892668 and 50572584 shares of Defendants held by the Associate Companies of the Defendants viz. Niket Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and Geet Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. respectively and further assured the Plai...
Dr. Dalvi Ali Abdul Quadar Vs. Kokan Mercantile Co-op. Bank Ltd. and O ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-03-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. The Petitioner has invoked Section 34 of Arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996 (for short Arbitration Act) and thereby challenge Award/order dated 22nd January, 2013 passed by the Arbitrator appointed by the Central Registrar, Cooperative Societies under Section 84 of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 (the Act). The operative part of the above is as under: The dispute application is dismissed with arbitration costs payable to the respondents in one set i.e. Rs.40,000/-. The disputant to beat his own. 3. Respondent No.1, a multi-state Co-operative Bank (the Bank) by letter dated 1st October, 2012 terminated the membership of the Bank and communicated to the Petitioner in following words: This is to inform you that you were a Director of M/s Ratna Drugs Ltd. and had stood surety for obtaining the loan granted by the Bank to the said company. The said loan was thereafter settled under...
Raju Mohandas Mahataney Vs. Shivkishan Manikchand Mundra and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-03-2013
P.C. The applicant is original accused No.3. He has challenged the order passed issuing process in case No.476/SS/11 pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 20th Court, Mazgaon, Mumbai. The complaint alleges offences punishable under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The applicant states that he has been arrayed as accused on the footing that he is a director of the original accused No.1, apart from the fact that the accused are based in Bengaluru in the State of Karnataka and, therefore, the learned Magistrate was obliged to take recourse to Section 202(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure as amended by the Amendment Act of 2005. In addition, the complaint does not disclose commission of any offence by the present applicant. It is stated that the applicant is a director of the applicant No.1, however, the averments in para-2 and 3 of the complaint are not enough to proceed against the applicant. The complainant has to aver and allege that t...
Sabita Mark Burges Vs. Mark Lionel Burges
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-03-2013
Rule. Made returnable forthwith. 1. The petitioner wife has challenged the order of the Judge, Family Court No.3, Bandra, Mumbai dated 14th March, 2013 allowing the application of the respondent husband to use and occupy one bedroom and to allow him to use facilities like kitchen, hall, w.c and bathroom in flat Nos. B-101 and 102, Wilfred Apartments Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Plot No.112, St. Leo Road, Bandra(W), Mumbai-400 050. The petitioner has not challenged the order of prohibitory injunction restraining her from selling, disposing off, transferring, letting out, alienating in any manner, the above mentioned matrimonial house and also restraining her from selling or disposing off or part with the articles existing in the house property. 2. In this writ petition the Court is only called upon to see whether an estranged husband who is prima facie shown to be violent can be allowed into the matrimonial home where the wife resides with her children. 3. The concept of a battere...
M/S. Rabo India Finance Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-03-2013
Oral Judgment: (Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) In these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution the Petitioner seeks to challenge the reopening of an assessment for Assessment Year 2006-07, under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by a notice dated 28 March 2011. The reopening in the present case is admittedly within a period of four years of the end of the relevant Assessment Year. The reasons on the basis of which the assessment is sought to be reopened are as follows : The assessee company is a wholly owned subsidiary of a Scottish bank. It is paying business support charges, guarantee fees and other service charges to its holding company. During the assessment year 2007-08, the AR was asked to produce the details of business support charges etc. received from the holding company. The details furnished by the AR shows that no substantial or specific services have been rendered by the holding company. Hence, the business support charges, guarantee fees paid to the holding c...
Haridas Rama Mahale Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-03-2013
Oral Judgment: (Smt. V.K. Tahilramani, J.) This appeal is directed by the appellant-original accused against the judgment and order dated 30.7.2008 passed by the learned Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge-1, Nashik in Sessions Case No.146 of 2007. By the said judgment and order, the learned Judge convicted the appellant under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment. 2. The prosecution case briefly stated, is as under: PW-5 Lila was the wife of the deceased Mohan. She was residing along with her husband Mohan, her children, her father in law and the appellant at Kalmuste. The appellant was the younger brother of her husband. There were house and property disputes between the appellant and Mohan. The incident occurred on 30.4.2006. At about 11 a.m. Mohan, the appellant and their father came home. PW-5 Lila served them lunch in the front room. Then she went to the kitchen. She heard her husband telling his younger brother i.e. the appellant that he will not give any share ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »