Mumbai Court July 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.
Way2 Wealth Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Amar Walmiki
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
Oral Judgment: (Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) The appeal arises from a judgment of the Learned Single Judge dated 17 April 2012 on a Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 2. The Appellant and the Respondent entered into a member-client agreement on 4 December 2008 in pursuance of which the Respondent became a client of the Appellant. The Appellant carries on business of stock broking both on the National Stock Exchange and the Bombay Stock Exchange. Between 9 April 2008 and 29 August 2008, the Appellant transacted on behalf of the Respondent by the purchase of 50,000 shares of a Company by the name of Refex Refrigerants. There was a debit of Rs.1.52 crores in the account of the Respondent. On 4 September 2008, the Respondent made a part payment of Rs.15 lakhs. There was a debit of Rs.77.15 lakhs On 8 September 2008 and 17 October 2008 the Appellant addressed letters of demand for the payment of the outstanding dues and eventually on 28 November 2008 addre...
Gaspar Monteiro, Now Deceased Through Lrs: and Others Vs. the Deputy C ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Mr. Almeida, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and Mr. Salkar, learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondent. 2. The present appeal is directed against the Judgment and Award dated 19/07/2002 passed by the learned District Judge, South Goa, Margao, (reference court, for short) in Land Acquisition Case No. 24/1997. 3. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the manner in which their names appear in the cause title of the Land Acquisition Case No. 24/1997. The appellants are the legal representatives of the original applicant and they shall be referred to as the applicants. 4. Vide Notification issued under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (L.A. Act, for short) and published in the Government Gazette No. 2, Series II dated 9/4/1992, land was acquired for construction of Dongri-Majorda, Dongrim Kucha Gabriel Church road, Our Lady Church to Toleaband Guirim road and Godinho road, in the Village Panchayat of...
National Insurance Co. Ltd., Through Its Divisional Manager Vs. Smt. N ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
Oral Judgment: The present first appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 21/11/2003 passed in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.292 of 1998 by learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur whereby petitioner-claimants were entitled for compensation of Rs.3,29,650/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition. 2) Facts briefly stated are as under One Lomeshwar Tamgadge, the husband of Smt.Nanubai Tamgadge (claimant No.1) and father of Shekhar Tamgadge (claimant No.2) was serving as conductor in Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation and was residing at Nagpur. On 21/12/1997 at about 8.45 p.m. when he was standing near the house of one Kailash Jiwanekar by the road side, one Tempo Trax (offending vehicle) bearing No.MP-22/B-4957 dashed him, which driven rashly and negligently. In the result, he suffered from serious injuries to which he was succumbed. The learned Tribunal held that Tempo Trax bearing No.MP-22/B-4957 caused the accide...
M/S Seema Constructions Engineers and Contractors Vs. Vidarbha Irrigat ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard finally with the consent of the parties. 2. Applicant has invoked Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'Arbitration Act) based upon the following clauses of tender contract Clause 30.1: Except where otherwise specified in the contract and subject to the powers delegated to him by Corporation under the code, rules then in force, the decision of Superintending Engineer of the Circle for the time being shall be final, conclusive and binding on all parties of the contract upon all questions relating to the meaning of the specifications, design, drawing and instructions herein before mentioned and as to the quality of workmanship or materials used on the work or as to any other questions claim, right, matter or thing whatsoever if any way arising out of or relating to the contract designs, drawings, specifications, estimates, instructions, orders or these conditions or otherwise concerning the works, or the execution or failure to execute...
Mahendra S/O. Tularam Deshmukh Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. The appellant feels aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gondia on 5th November, 2012 in Sessions Trial No.116 of 2009. The appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304-II of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six years and to pay fine of rupees five thousand in default to suffer simple imprisonment for six months. 2. The appellant was prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for having committed murder of his wife Nirmala Deshmukh at village Dahegaon at the house where the appellant and the deceased were staying. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the appellant and the deceased were staying in their house at Dehegaon. They were together in the night intervening 4th August, 2009 and 5th August, 2009. The deceased was found dead in the said premises with as many as three incised wounds and few mult...
Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Through Registrar Vs. SachI ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
Oral Judgment: (Anoop V. Mohta, J.) 1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned Counsel for the parties as the applications are moved for final and early hearing of the matter pertaining to the students. 2. The petitioner is a statutory University, established under the Maharashtra University of Health Sciences Act, 1998 (For short hereinafter referred to as the University Act) has invoked Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and prayed as under: (A) this Honble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Prohibition and or any other Writ, Order or Direction in the similar nature thereby prohibiting Respondent No.11 from trying, entertaining and deciding Consumer Complaint No.88 of 2013 filed by present Respondent Nos.1 to 8 before Respondent No.11, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as Respondent No.11 has absolutely no jurisdiction, competence, authority and power to try, entertain and decide the same; (B) this Honble Court be please...
Sandip Haridas Mankar Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
P.D. Kode P.D.J. The appellant/original accused no.1 in Sessions Case No.172/2004 has appealed against the judgment and order dated 30/04/2007passed by the learned Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge-4, Kolhapur, convicting and sentencing him for commission of offences as under:-S.No.Under SectionSubstantive Sentence of Rigorous imprisonment with payment of finedefault sentence for non-payment of fine1451 of I.P.C.5 years with fine Rs.2000/-R.I. for 1 year2452 of I.P.C. -do- -do-3461 of I.P.C.6 months with fine Rs. 500/-R.I. for 1 month4382 of I.P.C.7 years with fine Rs.2000/-R.I. for 1 year5392 R/w 394 R/w 397 of I.P.C.10 years with fine Rs.3000/-R.I. for 2 years6363 of I.P.C.3 years with fine Rs.1000/-R.I. for 6 months7307 of I.P.C.7 years with fine Rs.2000/-R.I. for 1 year8302 of I.P.C.Imprisonment of Life with fine of Rs.2000/-R.I. for 2 years9201 of I.P.C.2 years with fine Rs.1000/-R.I. for 3 month andordering substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed running concurrently. 2. Acco...
Voltas Limited Vs. State of Maharashtra (Through Its Department of Ind ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
M.S. Sonak, J. 1] By an order dated 24th September, 2012, the parties were put to notice that these writ petitions may be finally decided at the admission stage. Rule. Rule is made returnable with the consent of all the parties forthwith. 2] The petitioner challenges the order of reference dated 9th July, 2012 made under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'said Act') by the State of Maharashtra (respondent No.1) and the Additional Labour Commissioner (respondent No.2) at the behest of Voltas Employees Union (respondent No.3). 3] Mr. Cama appearing for the petitioner in both the matters, at the outset, submitted that there is no appreciable difference in the facts in Writ Petition No.2663 of 2012 and Writ Petition No.9863 of 2012, except that whereas in Writ Petition No.2663 of 2012 issue of contract labour is involved and in Writ Petition No.9863 of 2012 issues of casual labour and contract labour are involved. Accordingly, both these petitions are being disp...
Shyam Builders Vs. Hanumant Namdeo Khopade
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
Oral Judgment: The challenge in this Petition is to the order dated 15.12.2001 passed by the Executing court in Special Darkhast No.251 of 1997. In the said Darkhast which was filed for execution of a decree passed on 2.10.1997, the Executing Court has recorded a finding that the decree has been satisfied. Hence, the original decree holder is before this Court in this Writ Petition. The operative portion of the decree passed in Special Civil Suit No.470 of 1993 is reproduced as under: "1) Suit is decreed with costs. 2) The defendant do pay Rs.60,650/- to the Plaintiff. 3) The defendant shall pay future interest at the rate of 18% p.a.on the amount of Rs.40,000/- from the date of filing of the suit till its final realisation. " 4) Decree be drawn accordingly." 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner has relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of INDUSTRIAL CREDIT and DEVELOPMENT SYNDICATE NOW CALLED I.C.D.S. LTD vs. SMITHABEN H.PATEL and ORS reported in (1999)...
Satish @ Pintya Sham Masih Vs. Anil Chandar Chhajlani and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
Oral Judgment: This Civil Revision Application takes exception to the Judgment and Order passed by the District Judge-8, Ahmednagar on 2.2.2012, thereby confirming the Judgment and Order passed by the Trial Court in RCS No.589/2000. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant invited my attention to the averments in the application and also grounds taken therein as well as material placed on record and also the licence issued by the Office of the Cantonment Board, Ahmednagar and cross examination of the respondent-landlord and submits that both the Courts below have recorded perverse finding. It is submitted that so far as first issue which was framed by the Trial Court in respect of default in payment in arrears of rent is concerned, the applicant used to pay the rent in cash to the respondent-landlord. It is submitted that agreed rent was Rs.35/- however, the respondent asked the rent @ Rs.300/- p.m. In the first place it is submitted that rent amount for the period 1.7.1999 till ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »