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.
Subhash and Another Vs. the National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Its Di ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
Oral Judgment: Heard. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 2122013 passed by Labour Court, Wardha in WCA No. 1/2011. The appellants are the original applicants, who had filed an application under Section 22(2) of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 for determination of amount of compensation payable to them for the accidental death of their son, Suresh, during the course of the employment. Respondent no. 1, the insurance company is the original non-applicant no. 2 and respondent no. 2, the employer of deceased Suresh Tiwade is the original non-applicant no. 1. 3. The appellants claimed that death of Suresh Tiwade, who was the driver employed on the truck bearing registration no. MH-32-B-4685 owned by respondent no. 2 and insured with respondent no. 1, occurred on 17-11-2010 during the course and from out of the employment. Therefore, they filed an application before the Labour Court for determination of compensation payable to them. 4. Respondent no. 2 resis...
Ankush Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr. C.V. Dharurkar, the learned Counsel for the petitioner. Heard Mr. P.P. More, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent no.1. Heard Mr. S.J. Salunke, the learned Counsel for the respondent no.2. 2. Rule. By consent, Rule made returnable forthwith. The learned Counsel for the respondent no.2 waives service. By consent, heard finally. 3. The petitioner is the accused in S.C.C. No. 328/2007, pending before the Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Beed. The said case is in respect of offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The respondent no.2 herein, a Cooperative Bank, is the complainant in the said case. The trial is in progress. The evidence of the complainant has been adduced. The petitioner (hereinafter referred to as "the accused") has been examined under the provisions of Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [For short, "the Code"]. After the petitioner was examined, he made an applicatio...
Shivanand Shanbhag Vs. Ramesh G. Kolhi
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
Narendra Kawde, Member: (1) Complainant purchased a residential flat by way of executing registered agreement for sale on 07/11/2005 and subsequent Confirmation-cum-Deed to incorporate additional terms registered on 31/01/2006 with opponent, Shri Ramesh Kolhi of M/s.Star Developers (hereinafter referred to as opponent builder/developer). Agreed consideration for the flat was Rs.13,75,000/-. The complainant paid in all an amount of Rs.11,12,975/- to the opponent builder/developer. Possession of the flat was to be handed over to the complainant on or before June 2006. However, though more than 90% of amount was paid as against the agreed consideration, the opponent builder/developer has failed to deliver peaceful possession of the flat. The complainant has filed this consumer complaint alleging deficiency in service against the opponent builder/developer praying for possession of the flat with the agreed amenities or alternatively prayed for directions to the opponent builder/devel...
Libra Corporation, Mumbai Vs. Department of Income Tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
D. Karunakara Rao, AM: 1. This appeal filed by the Revenue on 4.7.2012 is against the order of the CIT (A)-30, Mumbai dated 4.4.2012 for the assessment year 2008-2009. 2. In this appeal, Revenue raised the following grounds which read as under: "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT (A) has erred in deleting penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act amounting to Rs. 40,00,000/- after concluding that addition was consequence of difference of opinion without appreciating the facts that offering income either under the head of "Business and Profession" or "Capital Gain" substantial effect on the rate of tax and thus reduce the tax liability which can also well be termed as furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. 2. The appellant prays that the order of the CIT (A) on the above ground be set aside and that of the AO be restored." 3. Briefly stated relevant facts of the case are that the assessee is a Firm engaged in the business of Development and Const...
Padmakar Patkar Vs. the Chief Commissioner of Central Excise and Anoth ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
Mrutyunjay Sarangi, Member (A): 1. The applicant, who works as Superintendent of Central Excise at the office of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Belapur, New Mumbai, is aggrieved by the framing of charges against him by his superior authorities and the consequent punishment awarded to him. 2. He submits that he was working as Superintendent, Central Excise in Panvel City Range of Panvel Division in Raigad Commissionerate in the year 2007. On 25.01.2007, at around 4 p.m., the officers of ADG Vigilance found a container at Turbhe being loaded with potato. On enquiry, they found that there was no papers such as Export Invoice with the operator. The Ware-house Keeper deposed that the cargo is for export purpose. After about six months, the officers of the Vigilance Wing traced out the copy of the invoice pertaining to the said container from the Custom House, which revealed that the container was stuffed in Panvel area with the signature of the charged officer and the invoice had a rub...
The Chalisgaon Municipal Council and Another Vs. the State of Maharash ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-29-2014
Oral Judgment: (S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.) 1. Rule. Respondent Nos.1, 3, 4 to 6 waive service. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith. 2. The petitioners have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, claiming a declaration that Section 49(7) and Section 127 of The Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (For short, the M.R.T.P. Act, 1966) are ultraviresArticle 14, 19(1)(g), 21, 21A, 47 and 243(w) of the Constitution of India and therefore, are liable to be struck down. They also claim a writ of certiorari or any other writ or direction to quash and set aside the communications dated 23/02/2010 and 17/04/2010, directing petitioner No.1 to deposit 2/3rd amount of the compensation in respect of a proposed land acquisition. Prayer clause 'D' of the writ petition reads as under : œIssue a writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or directions in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the State Government to forthwith release th...
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Its Manager Vs. Naina and Othe ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jan-29-2014
Oral Judgment: This appeal arises out of the judgment and Award passed on 01.04.2013 in Claim Petition No. 62 of 2010 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Achalpur. 2. The respondents 1 and 2 are the claimants who had filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the appellant and respondents 3 and 4 respectively, being the insurer of the tipper truck and driver and owner of the tipper truck. This tipper truck together with another vehicle, a luxury buss bearing registration No. MH-35-1671, was involved in the accident. The tipper truck had its registration number as MH-31-CB-4892. 3. It was the contention of the respondents 1 and 2 that their son Ashish Kumar was travelling by the luxury bus on 20.4.2010 when the said tipper truck gave a violent dash to the luxury bus, and it resulted in sustaining of grievous injuries by Ashish. Ashish was 22 years at the time of accident and soon after the accident he succumbed to the injuries sustained in the accident. ...
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and Another Vs. Shriji Enterprises Erandol ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-29-2014
1. Respondents (hereinafter referred as "Plaintiffs") have filed special Civil Suit No.80 of 2009 before Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon. The suit has been brought against present Applicants (hereinafter referred as "Defendants") for recovery of possession of property leased and recovery of lease amount. The dispute which has arisen between the parties is, whether Plaintiffs who have styled themselves as "Shreeji Enterprises Erandol" and shown themselves as partners, is a partnership under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 ("Partnership Act" in brief). 2. Prakash Bhatia and other three arrayed above, have filed the suit claiming that the property in dispute was leased out to Defendants Indian Oil Corporation by one Sarla Bahubali Gangwal. The Plaintiffs purchased the suit property from Sarla Bahubali Gangwal by registered sale deed, with right to the lease rent and as the rent was in arrears, the lease has been terminated and the possession has been claimed along with lease amount...
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. Through Its Branch Manage ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-29-2014
1. Heard finally. Admit. Record and proceeding received, perused. 2. In M.A.C.P. No. 110 of 2008, the learned District Judge-1, Beed by order dated 31.8.2013 passed award for amount of Rs.4,86,000/- with interest @ 7% p.a., against the original respondent Nos. 1 and 2, same is questioned by the appellant (original respondent No.2). 3. The claim petition was under Section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act for compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- towards death of Babasaheb Wankhede (deceased). On 8.2.2008, the deceased with his friend Krishna had been to village Madalmohi, Tq. Georai, from Jalna. The deceased was plying motor cycle MH-21-K-6325. His friend was pillion rider. When they reached near Padalsinghi, on Madalmohi to Padalsingi road, at about 9.30 p.m. one tempo was coming from opposite direction with dazzling lights, and due to its impact, the deceased could not control his vehicle, dashed against a tree and he with pillion rider, suffered grievous injuries. They were taken to Hospital. The...
Shantabai Vs. Sau Nanibai and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jan-29-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. The second appeal was admitted on 13.1.1998 on the following substantial questions of law stated in memo of appeal as 7.3 and 7. 4 “ œ7.3 Whether the courts below were justified in decreeing the suit by holding that even if there is no document of title in her favour, the respondent no.1 has perfected her title by adverse possession, thereby completely contravening the test of doctrine of adverse possession? 7.4 “ Whether the courts below were justified in granting decree of possession without determining the status of the appellant as to whether he was a licensee or a trespasser, in absence thereof no decree for mesne profit could be passed under Order 20, rule 12 of the Civil Procedure Code?? 2. The second appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 19.9.1997 delivered by the Additional District Judge, Wardha in RCA No. 161 of 1995 which was dismissed with costs. The said Regular Civil Appeal arose from the judgment and order dated 19.7...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »