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.
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Miss Clancy Arcanjia Dias and Oth ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
The appeal is filed against the judgment and award of Claim Petition No.86/2000 which was pending before MACT, Salcete, Margao. Both the sides are heard. 2. During arguments, the learned Counsel for appellant submitted that original respondent no.5, The United India Assurance Company Ltd. was liable to pay the compensation as the vehicle was insured by the owner with this Insurance Company and if it is found that respondent no.2 from the Claim Petition was wrongly deleted, the matter be remanded back. Other side was heard on this point also. Learned Counsel for original respondent no.3, the dealer of the vehicle supported the appellant on the aforesaid point. 3. In short, the facts leading to the institution of the appeal can be stated as follows: The accident took place on 2/03/2000. One Mahindra jeep bearing Temporary Registration No.MH-15-TRE-969 gave dash to the motorcycle of deceased Jose A. Dias, who was aged about 39 years. Jose A. Dias died in the accident. The Claim Petition w...
Arpan Jaru Bhosle and Another Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Through, A ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
Oral Judgment: (P.V. Hardas, J.) 1. Criminal appeal No. 97 of 2005 has been filed by the Appellant/Original Accused No.6, who stands convicted for an offence punishable under Section 3(1)(i) and also under Section 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 (for short M.C.O.C. Act) and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, in default to undergo further R.I. for one year with no separate sentence being awarded for conviction under Section 3(4) of the MCOC Act by the Special Judge under the M.C.O.C. Act, Pune, by Judgment dated 10.9.2004 in M.C.O.C. Special Case No. 3 of 2002, by this Appeal challenges his conviction and sentence. Alongwith the Appellant, Original Accused No.2 Kakdya @ Vithoba Bhosale has also been convicted for an offence punishable under Sections 3(1)(ii) and also under Section 3(4) of the M.C.O.C. Act and under Section 3(1)(ii) of the M.C.O.C. Act and is sentenced to R.I. for five years and to pay fine of Rs.5,00,000/- i...
Great Pacific Navigation (Holdings) Corporation Ltd. Vs. M.V. Tongil Y ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
1 The issue that arises from the Sheriff Report No.24 of 2012 dated 5.7.2012 is œWhat is the quantum of poundage that is payable by the plaintiffs to the Sheriff of Mumbai?? 2 Rule 474, 475 and 476 of the Bombay High Court (O.S) Rules provide as under:- œ474. Liability for Sheriff''s poundage - (1) In cases where a person is arrested or property is attached, the party or the Advocate on record for the party at whose instance the arrest was made or the attachment levied shall be liable to the Sheriff for his fees or poundage, as the case may be. (2) Any amount received by the judgment-creditor from the judgment-debtor in full or part satisfaction of a decree or order in respect of which a warrant of arrest or a warrant of attachment has been executed shall be presumed to have been realised under the warrant, if the warrant is merely suspended and not dead. (3) Where the execution-creditor or his Advocate on record receives directly any installment or other sum ordered to be ...
indira Pragati Shikshan Sanstha Vs. State of Maharashtra, Through Its ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
Oral Judgment: (A.S. Chandurkar, J.) 1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent of both the parties. 2. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the communication dated 27th of December, 2012 whereby the proposal of the petitioner “ Society for starting new Ashram School has been rejected. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that initially it was running an Ashram School at Rui, Tq. Bramhapuri, District “ Chandrapur. However, subsequently the recognition of said Ashram School was withdrawn by order dated 16th of February, 2009. The petitioner preferred appeal against said order of withdrawal of recognition. During pendency of the appeal, the said Ashram School was allotted to another institution. This action was challenged by the petitioner in Writ Petition No.3675 of 2009. By order dated 28th of June, 2010 the petitioner was permitted to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to apply for grant of permission to start another Ashram School. The au...
State of Goa, Represented by the Executive Engineer, Works Division Xx ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr. Pai, learned Additional Government Advocate for the petitioner. 2. By this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 02/09/2005 passed by the learned Additional District Judge-II, North Goa, Panaji in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 331/2004. 3. An award dated 19/06/2004 came to be passed by the Sole Arbitrator in the matter of execution of work of construction of road from Murdi village in Village Panchayat of Narva, Bicholim Taluka. The copy of the Arbitral Award was received by the petitioner on 21/06/2004. The petitioner presented its objections under Section 34(2)(a)(v) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('the Act' for short), before the District Judge, North Goa at Panaji, for setting aside the said award dated 19/06/2004. Since there was delay of 38 days in filing the said objections, the petitioner filed an application for condonation of delay, inter alia, alleging that...
Nahar Textiles Private Limited Vs. Reliance General Insurance Company ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
Narendra Kawde, Member: 1. Complainant “ Nahar Textiles Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the œInsured?) is a Company incorporated under Companies Act 1956, engaged in manufacturing and export of textile fabrics and garments. Second hand Sulzer Shuttles Projective Weaving Machines totaling 24 were imported by sea route from the Port of Louis (Mauritius) to JNPT India. First such lot of fourteen machines was shipped through MC Easy Freight and Co. Ltd., the forwarding Agents through the ocean vessel Voyage No. MAERSK WINDHOEK918 on 02.07.2009. Insured with a view to avail Letter of Credit (hereinafter referred to as œL/C? in short) facility with Bank of India, Chakala Branch, Andheri East, Mumbai, approached the Bankers, who imposed condition to insure the machines and deposit risk Cover Note with them. Therefore, for providing insurance cover to the imported machines was availed under Marine Policy Cover Note to insure risk upto Rs.2,40,00,000/- (Rupees 240 ...
Kallil Kuniyil Govindan, Kannur Vs. Mineral Exploration Corporation Lt ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
(BOMBAY BENCH, MUMBAI. CAMP NAGPUR) (Oral). Chameli Majumdar, Member (J). The applicant, an employee of M.E.C.L., who retired on 31.12.2005, has filed this O.A. on the ground that his request for payment of interest on the amount of arrears of pay from 2007-2008 to 28.12.2011 has not been acceded to. Applicant made several representations for payment of interest, the last of such representation being 21.09.2013. 2. Heard Shri D. N. Mathur, Learned Counsel for applicant. Shri M.D. Samel, Learned Counsel appears on behalf of Respondent No. 1. and Ms. Neerja Choubey, Proxy Counsel for Shri G. Choubey, learned counsel, appears on behalf of Respondent No. 2. 3. Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 1 submits that regarding entitlement of pay revision arrears, the same is pending adjudication before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The learned counsel for the applicant, however, submits that in the instant case, pursuant to the orders of the Tribunal and Hon'ble High Court at Nagpur, the arrears of p...
Pratibha Burman, Nagpur (M.H.) Vs. Union of India Through Its General ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
(BOMBAY BENCH, MUBAI CAMP AT NAGPUR) (Oral). Chameli Majumdar, Member (J). 1. The applicant has approached this Tribunal for the following reliefs : "8.1. To release the family pension in favour of the applicant (effective from herentitlement till date of her marriage30.04.2011) and 8.2. To award : (i). Costs (ii). Damages as deemed fit (iii). 18% interest on the accrued sum of the Family Pension till dateand any other relief (s) which the Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit." 2. The facts of the case, as made out in the O.A., are that the applicant was unmarried at the time of the death of her father, late Shri Nimai Chaitu, who died in harness on 02.06.1993. The applicant got married on 30.04.2011. In 2009, the brother of the applicant represented before the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Settlement Section, stating inter alia that the father, who was a Shunter under Loco Foreman, Nainpur, died on 02.06.1993. The mother died prior to the death of the father of applicant. Both, the brothe...
Yashwant Tulsiram Kamble, Nagpur Vs. Union of India, Through General M ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
(BOMBAY BENCH, MUMBAI. CAMP: NAGPUR) (Oral). Chameli Majumdar, Member (J). 1. The applicant in the present O.A., who is the son of deceased railway employee, late Shri Tulsiram Vithoba Kamble, is seeking the relief of family pension. 2. Heard Shri G. P. Bhave, Learned Counsel for the applicant and Shri Alok Upasani, Learned Counsel for the respondents. 3. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that after the death of the father of the applicant, his mother was getting the family pension. The mother of the applicant died on 31.10.2005. The applicant, who is visually disabled with 100% permanent disability, represented for family pension to the respondents in terms of Rule 75(6) of the Railway Servants (Pension) Rules, 1993. Since the applicant did not receive any response, he has approached this Tribunal by way of O.A. No. 2038/2011. This Tribunal, vide its order dated 01.07.2011, directed the authorities to decide representation of the applicant. In compliance with the order of ...
Pitamber and Another Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Through Its Secreta ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-16-2014
Oral Judgment: (Ravindra V. Ghuge, J.) 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. The petitioner is an agriculturist aged 77 years. It is stated that he is suffering from various ailments. He is a joint owner of agricultural land Gat No.933 (Old Survey No.212/1), admeasuring 15-R. The said land is in the joint ownership and possession of the petitioner. 3. Respondent No.2 is the Municipal Council, Faizpur, Tal. Yawal, Dist. Jalgaon. In 1981, respondent No.2 clamped reservation on survey no. 205 for creation of a library. The petitioner is unconcerned with the said survey. The chart of reservation, supplied to the petitioner under the Right to Information Act, evidences this fact. However, map drawing the reservation has wrongly shown survey No.212 which belongs to the petitioner. The copy of the reservation chart and the map is at Annexure œB?, which is at Page No.13 and 14 of the petition paper book. 4. The petitioner made an application...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »