Mumbai Court January 2014 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.
Hsbc Pi Holdings (Mauritius) Limited Vs. Avitel Post Studioz Limited a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-22-2014
By this petition filed under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, petitioner seeks an order and direction against respondents to deposit monies to the extent of the claims of the petitioner under Share Subscription Agreement and Share Holders Agreement including the investment of approximately US$ 60 million and cost and/or in the alternative to provide adequate and satisfactory security in regard to the claims of the petitioner. Petitioner also claims disclosure of all the assets, moneys, bank deposits and accounts held by the respondents singly or jointly and/or severally including but not limited to the accounts with Corporation Bank by an affidavit. Petitioner seeks injunction restraining the respondents from dealing with their assets including bank accounts with Corporation Bank. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this petition are as under :- 2 (a) Petitioner is a company incorporated under the laws of Mauritius and has its registered offic...
Anju Shah Vs. State, Through Public Prosecutor
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-22-2014
The appeal is filed against judgment and order of Special Case No.17/2006, which was pending before the President, Children's Court for the State of Goa at Panaji. The appellant is convicted and sentenced for offences punishable under Section 342, 323, and 366-A of Indian Penal Code and also under Section 4 and 5 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'PITA'). For offences punishable under Section 8(9) of Goa Children's Act, 2003 also there is conviction. The maximum sentence of imprisonment of 7 years is given under the provisions of PITA and all sentences are to run concurrently. Both the sides are heard. 2. In short, the facts leading to the institution of the appeal can be stated as follows: The prosecutrix is a Bangladeshi national. At the relevant time, she was aged about 14 years. One Parveen alias Aarti hails from the village of prosecutrix from Bangladesh. Jitendra alias Jitu is the husband of Aarti. Aarti, her brother and father used to visit th...
State of Goa Vs. Ganesh Hegde and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-22-2014
Oral Judgment: The revision is filed to challenge the order of discharge made in Sessions Case No.24/2012, which was pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, South Goa, Margao. The respondents are discharged of the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sides are heard. 2. This Court has perused the entire record of investigation and this Court has also gone through the reasoning given by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. The deceased, Vincy was a friend of the respondents. He was aged about 20 years. He had taken a hand loan of Rs.5,000/- from Maruti. 3. The deceased left home on 11/06/2012 and on that day right from beginning he was in the company of the accused. He visited various places where he consumed liquor, food and purchased tobacco with these persons. He left the bar where they had consumed liquor and taken meal at about 12.30 p.m. A friend of Vincy used to call him. On that day, when she realised that Vincy ...
Ashraf Khan Vs. Zaheeda Kazi and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-22-2014
The appeal is filed against judgment and decree of Civil Suit No.20/2005, which was pending in the Court of District Judge-1, Panaji. The suit of appellant filed for relief of specific performance of contract and in alternative for the return of consideration amount is dismissed by the trial Court. Learned Counsel for the appellant and respondents no.2 and 3 are heard. 2. Respondent no.1 was duly served, but she did not turn up. The learned Additional Government Advocate remained present, but there was no interest of Additional Government Advocate, State in the present matter. 3. In short, the facts leading to the institution of the appeal can be stated as follows: The suit is filed in respect of property bearing survey no.40/2 admeasuring 4500 square metres situated at Village Ponda (bearing matriz no.575) and old cadastral survey no.17/3 having area of 12300 square metres (together bearing matriz no.429) situated at Khadpabandh, Ponda within jurisdiction of Ponda Municipality, proper...
New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Prasanna and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-22-2014
1. Heard Mr. Deshpande for the appellant. 2. Notices were issued on 12th Jan., 2012, informing that the appeal could be decided finally at the stage of admission. There was no response to the notices. Consequently, Civil Application was moved for paper publication which was allowed on 26.2.2012. Inspite of such publication of notice, no participation from respondents. 3. Heard. Considering issue involved and since record is available, the appeal is heard finally in absence of respondents (original claimants). 4. The appellant Insurance Company questions award dated 18.10.2011 recorded by the learned Ad hoc District Judge and Ex Officio Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nanded, in MACP No. 523/2001 thereby awarding an amount of Rs. 2,65,000/- with interest at the rate of 6.5 per cent per annum from the date of registration of the application till payment. 5. Deceased Dhirendra was proceeding towards Kalambar (Bk.) on his motor cycle on 30th March, 2001. However, in order to avoid ...
Anwar Musa Sayyed Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
Oral Judgment: (P.V. Hardas, J.) 1 Appellants- the original accused nos.1, 3 and 7 who stand convicted for an offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to each to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of which to undergo further RI for one year, by the Additional Judge,, Alibaug, Dist. Raigad by judgment dated 9 July 2008, in Sessions Case No.184 of 2007, by this appeal challenge their conviction and sentence. 2 The facts in brief, as are necessary for the decision of this appeal, may briefly be stated thus: (i) PW-9 PI Suhas Garud who was attached to Alibaug police station and was on duty on 23.2.2007 received a telephone call from the police station Alibaug at about 9pm about a quarrel which had taken place at Mandvi Mohalla. It was also informed that due to the quarrel a crowd had gathered in the civil hospital at Alibaug. PW-9 PI Garud immediately proceeded to Mandvi Mohalla area of Alibaug and had ...
Anant Kavlekar and Others Vs. Mrs. Milan Dantie Alias Anita Dantie and ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties. 2. Admit on the following substantial questions of law: 1) Whether without a finding that the land is assessed to payment of land revenue, the provisions of Order 20 Rule 18 of the C.P.C. are applicable. 2) Whether it is permissible in law to order the Collector to partition plots, bearing different survey numbers in an Office of the City Survey, wherein there are several buildings. 3) Whether, when improvements/repairs have been carried out and new structures put up on the property by a co-owner without objection, it would be necessary to determine the value of the improvements/repairs carried out and of the new structures before partitioning the land. 3. By consent, heard forthwith. 4. This Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 15/10/2011 passed by the District Judge-II, South Goa, Margao (First Appellate Court) in Regular Civil Appeal No. 222 of 2010, which in turn was filed against the ju...
Charak Pharma Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
1. The Plaintiff has filed the present Suit against the Defendant, inter alia, for a perpetual order and injunction, restraining the Defendant from infringing the registered trademark of the Plaintiff "EVANOVA" and also from passing off their goods/products as those of the Plaintiff by use of the mark "ECONOVA" or any other mark deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs registered mark. By the present Notice of Motion, the Plaintiff has sought a temporary injunction against the Defendant from manufacturing and marketing any medicinal preparations/products by using the mark "ECONOVA". 2. The Plaintiff is engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing of ayurvedic medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations. The Plaintiff carries on the said business in the name of a Partnership firm M/s. Charak Bhandar since 1949. The original Plaintiff No.1 i.e. Charak Pharmaceuticals (India) Pvt. Ltd. was incorporated in May, 1970. In 1999, the original Plaintiff No.1 applied for registration and go...
National Inssurrance Co. Ltd. Vs. Zanak and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
Oral Judgment: Heard finally. None for the respondents though duly served. 2. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and Award passed on 23.11.2012 in Claim Petition No. 365 of 2009 by Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 1, Nagpur. 3. Respondents 1 to 4 were the petitioners who had filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against respondent no. 5 and the present appellant. It was their case that their youngest brother Ramesh Jaypal Morasiya died in a vehicular accident which occurred on National High Way No. 6 on 28.3.2009. According to them, at the relevant time, deceased Ramesh was proceedings on a bicycle from the direction of village Kharbi to a Petrol Pump on the National High Way and at that time one truck bearing registration No. AP-29/U-1597 came in a high speed from behind and dashed against left side of bicycle of Ramesh. Ramesh sustained serious injuries and died of them. Offences were registered for rash and negligent driving agai...
State of Goa Vs. M/S. Shivani Laboratories and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
Heard Mr. Lawande, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State and Mr. Usgaonkar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.5. 2. This is a State appeal against acquittal of respondent no.5 above-named, vide judgment and order dated 19/04/2010, passed in Criminal Case No. 192/N/96/F/III. 3. For convenience, the parties shall hereinafter be referred to as arrayed before the Magistrate. 4. The State, through the Drugs Inspector namely Ms. Jyoti Sardessai, had lodged the complaint before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, at Margao against five accused persons for contravention of the provision of Section 18(a)(i) punishable under Section 27(c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 ('the Act', for short), which came to be registered as Criminal case No. 192/N/96/III. 5. The case of the complainant, in short, is as follows: The accused no.1 is a Partnership Firm having manufacturing premises at Shirali, Uttar Kannada and is engaged in drug manufact...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »