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.
Pradeep Somnath Gupta Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-23-2013
S.B. Shukre, J. This petition is directed against the order dated 23rd April, 2003 passed by respondent No.1 externing the petitioner for a period of two years from the Districts of Thane, Greater Mumbai and Mumbai Suburban and also the order dated 4th July, 2013 passed by the appellate authority confirming the order of the externment of the petitioner. 2. This petition has been heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the parties. Hence, Rule made returnable forthwith. Learned A.P.P. for the State waives service of notice for the respondents. 3. We have heard Mr. S.R. Goud, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. K.V. Saste, learned A.P.P. for the State. 4. The main contention canvassed on behalf of the petitioner is that a show cause notice dated 19th December, 2012 does not give sufficient notice of material allegations against the petitioner and thus denies him an opportunity to defend himself properly in the case. The second contention raised by lea...
Arvind S/O Nilkanth Jawdand Vs. the Chief Executive Officer and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
Oral Judgment: (Anoop V. Mohta, J) 1] Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2] The petitioner has challenged order dated 20.12.2008 passed by respondent no.2-the Senior Accounts Officer, Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur, whereby deducted an amount of Rs.66,424/- from the retiral dues of the petitioner and also challenged order dated 4th January, 2013 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur in Appeal under Rule 13(d) read with 14 (1)(a)(c) of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad District Services (Discipline and Appeals) Rules, 1964. 3] The petitioner was in service for more than 39 years with respondent no.1 and he was witness to the departmental inquiry conducted against Shri Dhengale, wherein he was charge-sheeted for misappropriation of cement. The inquiry report was submitted on 8.1.2007 holding Shri Dhengale guilty of the charge and in the inquiry report observation is made that others including the petitioner might be involved in ...
Asif Ahmedally Porbunderwalla Vs. Mrs. Daulat Akbarali Porbunderwalla ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
By this Notice of Motion, defendant no.7 seeks rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and also seeks that the suit be summarily dismissed as not maintainable. Defendant no.7 also seeks in the alternative that the issue of limitation be framed and decided as a preliminary issue by this Court. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this Notice of Motion are as under:- 2. Plaintiff claims to be one of the beneficiary under the Trust Deed dated 12th June, 1972 whereby a trust known as 'Ali Mohamed K. Porbanderwala Family Trust' was set up in respect of the land and building situated at Bandra. Defendant nos. 1 to 4 are the trustees of the said trust. Defendant no.5 is husband of defendant no.1. Defendant nos. 6 and 7 are children of defendant no. 1 and defendant no.5. Defendant no.7 claims to be one of the beneficiary under the said trust. It is the case of the plaintiff that in 1976 defendant nos. 1 and 2 in exercise of their power...
Mrs. Neeta Bhalchandra Kalghatgi and Others Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
Oral Judgment: This appeal by the plaintiffs is directed against the decree of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Vasco-da-Gama refusing interest on the sum of Rs.11,55,433.42 which the learned Judge ordered the defendants to pay to the plaintiffs. 2. The facts, which are material for deciding this appeal are mostly not in dispute or cannot be disputed. 3. There was Special Civil Suit No.157/1982 between the brothers and daughters of Narhari Narvekar. The defendants in that suit, are the plaintiffs in the present suit. In that suit, a receiver was appointed. Initially, Advocate Shirsat was appointed as receiver. Thereafter, Advocate Surendra Dessai was appointed in his place and lastly, Shri Sandesh Naik was appointed as receiver. These receivers maintained a current account with the defendant State Bank of India in which a sum of Rs.11,55,453.42 was lying. The parties filed consent terms in the said suit and the suit was decreed in accordance with those consent terms. The plaintiff...
Ramji S/o Jadhav Kahalkar and Another Vs. the Commissioner for Workmen ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
Oral Judgment: By this present appeal, the appellants raised question about the validity and legality of the impugned judgment and order dated 03/08/2004 passed by learned Commissioner, Labour Court, Bhandara under the Workmen's Compensation Act in F.W.C.A. Case No.9 of 1997. 2) Facts briefly stated as under Deceased Shriram Kahalkar was the son of original applicants-appellants. They had claimed compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act on the ground that they are dependents of the deceased Shriram Kahalkar. 3) Learned Commissioner held that the applicants failed to prove that the salutary fact that applicants (present appellants) were dependents of the deceased workman and that deceased Shriram died by accident arising out of and in the course of employment with Rajkumar Prataprai Paryani. Learned Advocate on behalf of the appellants strongly relied upon averments made in the application under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 pleading that the deceased was o...
Syed Kausar Shah S/O Mansoor Shah Vs. Syed Gous Ahmed Shah S/O Syed Ma ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
This Civil Revision Application takes exception to the judgment and order passed by the Presiding Officer, Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad in Regular Civil Suit No. 23 of 2002 on 17th March, 2004. 2. The revision applicant herein, is the original defendant and the respondent No.1 herein, is the original plaintiff. (For sake of brevity, the parties will be referred to their original status as 'plaintiff' and 'defendant No.1'). The plaintiff filed suit for declaration that, the land Survey No.3 admeasuring 07 acres 14 guntha situated at Beed is service Inam land belonging to Dargah of Hazrat Mansoor Shah Wali, Beed. The plaintiff sought further declaration that, the plaintiff is 'Mutawali' of above wakf property and continues to be 'Mutawali', in pursuance of the order passed by the Deputy Collector (Atiyat), Beed on 23rd March, 1971. The plaintiff prayed for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant No.1 from interfering and disturbing affairs pertaining to Dargah Mansoor Sha...
Mrs. Hamida Salim Khan Vs. Commissioner of Police and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
G.S. Patel, J. 1. This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenges a detention order dated 12th March 2013 No. D.O.No.04/PCB/DP/Zone-IV/2013 issued by the Respondent No. 1, the Commissioner of Police under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Dangerous Persons and Video Pirates Act, 1981 (the Act). The Petitioner is the mother of the Detenu, one Samad Salim Khan. 2. The Petition states that apart from the order of detention itself, the Detenu was also served the copy of the grounds of detention on the basis of which the detaining authority arrived at his subjective satisfaction for issuing the detention order. In addition, the Detenu was also served with a compilation of the documents relied on by the Detaining Authority. 3. The basis of the detention order is that the detenu is a violent, dangerous criminal persistently given to terrorising the residents of different localities with dangerous weapon...
The State of Maharashtra and Others Vs. Shantaram B. Nawale (Deceased) ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
Oral Judgment: (Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) The prayer in the Civil Application is for modification of an order dated 17 July 2012 passed by a Division Bench consisting of Hon'ble Mr.Justice S.A. Bobde (as His Lordship then was) and Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Mridula Bhatkar and for an extension of time for issuance of a notice under Section 16(2)(a) of the Maharashtra Resettlement of Project Affected Persons Act, 1999 by a period of six months. 2. The Division Bench delivered a judgment dated 17 July 2012 on a batch of matters where the Petitioners were owners of agricultural lands which were acquired for the Bhama Askhed Project. The Division Bench observed that it was not disputed that: (i) The lands were acquired by the State Government for submergence in the Bhama Askhed Project; (ii) The Petitioners were not given any notice by the Collector informing them of their entitlement to get alternate land; and (iii) The Petitioners were not given notice under Section 16(2)(a) of the Act. The Pe...
The Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Through Its Division ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
Oral Judgment: The appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as Act) is directed against the Judgment and Award dated 15-09-1998 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Yavatmal in MACP No.47 of 1991 whereby the Tribunal had partly allowed the claim in the sum of Rs.6,49,000/- inclusive of no fault liability together with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of the petition till deposit of the entire amount in the Tribunal within one month. 2) The facts in brief are as under: On 08-12-1990 Late Shri Mukund Govindrao Dongre, aged about 38 years was an Agricultural Supervisor in Yavatmal District Central Cooperative Bank victim of the motor vehicle accident while he was travelling along with Peon Madhukar. After taking the Cash to the Bank, they were returning back by the Jeep bearing registration No.MHX-4365 driven by Shivaji Laxman Palkar. When the Jeep had come near village Yarad disaster took place between 12.00 to 1.00 p.m. At that time ...
Praveen S/O Prabhakarrao Jawale Vs. Maharashtra State Electricity Dist ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
Oral Judgment: (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 learned Advocate for the respondent nos.1 and 2. 3] The facts involved in the case are summarized as follows: a] The petitioner is employed as Junior Engineer with the respondent no.1. b] While the petitioner was serving at the Distribution Centre at Aurangabad in Chhawani Sub-Division in Division No.1, it is alleged that on 1.3.2011, he demanded and accepted an amount of Rs.5,000/- as bribe and was caught while doing so (red handed) by Police personnel of Anti Corruption Department, Aurangabad. c] Crime No.3005/2011 under Section 7, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was registered against the petitioner. d] By communication dated 4.3.2011, the petitioner was kept under suspension in contemplation of the action under Maharashtra State Electri...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »