Mumbai Court August 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.
Narayan S/O Vithoba Kumbhare Vs. Joint Commissioner and Vice-chairman, ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-06-2013
Oral Judgment: ( Anoop V. Mohta, J.) 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner was appointed on 6.2.1998 as Assistant Extension Officer on a concurrent post on the basis of Halba Scheduled Tribe. He has completed probation period on 6.2.1998 as recorded in office order dated 12.1.2001. The petitioner has filed the present petition to claim protection in view of the judgments of the Supreme Court as well as this Court including the recent judgment of this Court (Coram : Anoop V. Mohta and Z.A. Haq, JJ.) dated 10.07.2013 in Writ Petition No.5530/2012 (Ku. Vijaya Deorao Nandanwar...Versus...Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Wardha) and others. 3. There is no notice and/or threat issued by the petitioner till this date. In the office memorandum dated 10.8.2010, in paragraph no.3, it is observed as under: 3. The matter has been examined in consultation with the Department of Legal Affairs and it has been decid...
Ganpat S/O Shripat Gotre Vs. State of Maharashtra Through Principal Se ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Aug-06-2013
R.V. Ghuge, J. Heard. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the parties. 3. The petitioner, by way of this writ petition, is praying for releasing of his land by issuance of a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ. The petitioner's land admeasuring 0 H. 69 R. bearing C.T.S.No.404/3 is situated within the limits of respondent no.6 Chalisgaon Municipal Council. The said land is adjacent to the relevant plan as provided under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as "the MRTP Act"). It is the contention of the petitioner that under Section 38 read with Section 23(1) of the MRTP Act, the revision of the development plan of respondent no.6 Municipal Council was undertaken by notification dated 9th July, 1987, after inviting objections under the provisions of Section 28 of the MRTP Act. 4. It is further contended that on 3rd Dec., 1988, the development plan was submitted to respondent no.2 Di...
Nisargdeep Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Thro ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Aug-06-2013
A.H. Joshi, J. 1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and taken up for final hearing with the consent of learned Advocates for the parties. 2] Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned AGP for the respondent nos.1 to 4. 3] The petitioner is a society and public trust. It runs a senior college in a rental accommodation at village Chittepimpalgaon Tq. and Dist.Aurangabad, where 600 students are taking education. 4] The petitioner applied to Tahsildar, Aurangabad, for allotment of 5 Acres land which are Survey Nos.142 and 143 of village Chittepimpalgaon, from Gairan abutting highway, as is seen from map at page no.66 of the paper book. Said application was filed on 14.1.2012. 5] It is seen from the paper book that the petitioner claimed allotment of land pursuant to Government circular dated 28.6.1999 which governs the policy pertaining to allotment of land subject to the statute and rules in that regard. 6] According to the petitioner, entire process required to be compl...
National Insurance Company Ltd., Through Its Divisional Manager Vs. Sa ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-06-2013
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The only grievance raised by the appellant is that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is excessive. No other point is argued and therefore, the controversy to be decided in this case is within the narrow compass. 2. It is not disputed that Sukhvandir Singh was working as driver on Truck No.CG-04 ZC-5065 belonging to original respondent No.1. While driving the said truck, the truck struck against a pole on 27.11.2002 on National Highway No.6 in Raipur District (M.P.) as a result of which Sukhvandir Singh died. The said truck was insured with present appellant (original respondent No.2). 3. The Tribunal held that claimants were entitled to compensation of Rs.2,65,500/- together with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization from appellant and respondent No. 2 jointly and severally. 4. Learned counsel for appellant insurer extraneously argued that the Tribunal presumed the monthly income of deceased Sukhvi...
Nandkishor S/O Laxman Dhodare and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-06-2013
B.R. Gavai, J. The appellants have preferred these appeals against the judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Gadchiroli in Sessions Case No.109/2003, thereby convicting the appellants/accused for the offences punishable under Section 302, 307, 325, 324 and 452 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to suffer imprisonment for life, five years, two years, one year and one year respectively for the aforesaid offences. 2) The prosecution case, as could be briefly summarised, is as under: One Dadaji Masaji was having a contract for collecting tendu leaves in village Nimdar Dongari. On account of the said contract of tendu leaves, there was a dispute between the family of Dadaji Masaji on one hand and the other villagers on the other hand. On account of dispute, a meeting was convened by the Police Officers and Forest Officers and the contract was given to Bandu Kashinath Dhanorkar (accused no.2) by withdrawing the same from Dadaji Masaji. It is the...
Mohammad HussaIn Vs. Radha W/O Deelip Salve and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Aug-06-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard both sides. 2. The present two Appeals have arisen out of the directions issued by the Ex-Officio Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Parbhani, directing the present appellants to pay compensation, penalty and interest to the claimants i.e. widow, parents and children of the deceased. The learned Commissioner directed that while the present both the appellants-employer as well as insurer shall jointly and severally pay the compensation of Rs.5,52,510/- to the claimants, sofar as the interest at the rate of 12% p.a. is concerned, Mohammad Hussain Shaikh Hayat-employer (present appellant in F.A. 1782/2012) was directed to pay interest from the date of accident till its full and final realization alongwith penalty of Rs.2,76,255/-. Aggrieved by the direction to pay interest and penalty, present First Appeal No.1782/2012 is preferred by the appellant-employer while aggrieved by the entire order, directing to pay compensation, First Appeal no.1327/2013 is preferred...
Bhushan S. Nadkarni Vs. Miss. Melita Goes D/O. Minguel Francis Goes Re ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-05-2013
Oral Judgment: This appeal by owner of motor car bearing no.GA-02-1076 which was involved in accident on 17/10/2003, questions the award by the learned Presiding Officer of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Margao directing payment of compensation of Rs.2,07,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum to the claimant. The award also directed that respondent no.4-Insurance Company would be entitled to recover the amount of compensation from the present appellant. 2. Facts which are material for deciding this appeal are as under: The petitioner, who was 13 year old student was walking by the side of Benaulim-Varca road on 17/10/2003 at about 7.45 a.m. Car no.GA-02-1076 driven by respondent no.1, the driver engaged by the present appellant, gave a dash to the victim which resulted in fractures of her jaw bone, left leg and left hand. The victim also lost 6 teeth. The accident occurred because respondent no.1 was allegedly talking on mobile phone while driving the vehicle. The claima...
Sau. Snehal Omprakash Kothekar Vs. Shri. Omprakash Domaji Kothekar
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Aug-05-2013
Oral Judgment: Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, this application is taken up for final disposal. 2. This Misc. Civil Application is filed seeking transfer of the proceedings bearing Hindu Marriage Petition No. 152 of 2012 pending in the Court of the learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati. 3. It is the case of the applicant that, on 21st May, 2010 the marriage between the applicant and the respondent was solemnized. It is the contention of the applicant that, thereafter the respondent started ill-treating her, therefore, she left matrimonial house and came to her parent's house at Nanded. It is further case of the applicant that, she has filed proceedings under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2006 and also for maintenance under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The respondent-husband filed H.M.P. No. 152 of 2012 before the Court of the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati on 25th O...
Madhav Premsing Rathod Vs. the State of Maharahtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Aug-05-2013
1. The application is filed under section 439 (2) of Criminal Procedure Code for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalna in Criminal Application No. 403/2013. In crime registered against the respondent No. 2 for offence punishable under sections 306, 354 (A) etc. of Indian Penal Code, relief of anticipatory bail is granted. 2. The crime is registered on the basis of report given by the father of the deceased. The respondent/accused is a married man and at the relevant time, he was aged about 25 years. He has no issue from the wife. Allegations are made that he was after the deceased girl and he wanted to marry with her. The deceased was aged about 17 years and even before the incident in question the deceased had disclosed to her father about such conduct of the accused. She had also informed that she had said 'no' to the offer given by the accused, but he was always after her and he was insisting her to marry with him. 3. The incident took pla...
Gopalrao Ambadasrao Borikar Vs. the State of Maharashtra Through the S ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Aug-05-2013
A.H. Joshi, J. 1] Taken up for hearing by consent of parties. 2] This is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner is a retired Government Servant. He has approached this court against the order passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, dismissing the Transfer Application No. 1080 OF 1991. 3] Petitioner's prayers before the Tribunal were for quashing the orders of promotions granted to his juniors and claiming mandatory reliefs for giving him the effect of promotion to the post of Tahsildar including a deemed date corresponding to the date of supersession. Due to efflux of time, the relief by way of quashing has become ineffective. 4] Brief reference to petitioner's service record would suffice for the purpose of this petition, which is as follows:- [a] Petitioner is an Ex-Hyderabad State employee, who had entered into service on 1st November, 1950 as a Levy Inspector. He was permanently allocated to the State of Bombay after reorganiza...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »