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.
Ramnath D. Mungse and Another Vs. M/S. Yogam Enterprises and Another
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-28-2014
R.C. Chavan, President: [1] We have heard Adv. Anand V. Patwardhan on behalf of the Revision Petitioners. We have also perused the record. [2] This revision petition is directed against an order dated 25/07/2013 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Thane in Consumer Complaint No.402 of 2007, holding that the applications filed by the Revision Petitioners herein/original Complainants for initiating an action as contemplated under Section-13(5) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 shall be decided when the complaint is finally disposed of. Revision Petitioners/original Complainants had a grievance about the affidavits filed by Mr. Ramesh Babu Solkar and others. Learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioners submits that the question as to whether the affidavits are false or not and whether an action is required to be taken against those deponents can be independently dealt with irrespective of merits of the complaint and he submits that the deponents had tried to pl...
Mahesh S. Malvankar Vs. the Union of India, Through the Director (Pand ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-28-2014
A.J. Rohee, Member (J): 1. By this application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) the applicant has challenged the impugned memorandum/chargesheet dated 30.07.2007, disagreement memo dated 18.04.2011 and the penalty order dated 28.06.2011 both issued by the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority's order dated 24.01.2012 confirming the penalty in the departmental proceeding initiated against the applicant. 2. The applicant was initially appointed as a Peon on 15.02.1994 in the office of Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC), Lower Parel, Mumbai. While in service he qualified SSC examination in the year 1996 and was promoted to the cadre of Lower Division Clerk on 15.04.2004. 3. On 08.01.2007, the applicant was attached to Despatch Section. It is alleged that shri P.G. Panchal and Narotham Panchal, partners of M/s. Bharat Engineering Works (hereinafter referred to as the firm) made verbal complaint to Shri S...
Chhaboolal Dhurve Vs. Union of India Through Its General Manager and O ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-28-2014
(BOMBAY BENCH, MUMBAI, CAMP: NAGPUR) Chameli Majumdar, Member (J): 1. The applicant is the ex-railway employee, who has filed this O.A. for the following relief : "That the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to pass an order to the respondents to release the Compassionate Allowances along with permissible allowances from date of removal (30.06.1995) of the applicant from service in the light of Railway Board's order No.F(E)III/2003/PN1/5 dated 04.11.2008 (Annexure A-1). Any other relief which the Hon'ble CAT deems fit to pass in form of pecuniary benefit." 2. The facts of the case, as made out by the applicant in the present O.A. are as follows : The applicant was working in the erstwhile South East Railway and now South East Central Railway. While working as Diesel Assistant (now Assistant Loco Pilot) he was charge sheeted for remaining unauthorizedly absent from duty. A disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him. He was removed from service w.e.f. 30.06.1995. The punishment order dat...
Jayawantabai and Another Vs. Union of India, Through General Manager a ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-28-2014
Chameli Majumdar, Member (J). 1. The applicant, being the second wife of the deceased railway employee, filed this Original Application challenging the order dated 23.04.2006, wherein, it is mentioned that after the death of railway employee on 10.12.85, his first wife Smt. Saraswatabai was sanctioned family pension payable through Post Office, Amgaon. The second wife intimated the authorities that the first wife expired on 23.08.1986 and on her death, she would be entitled for sanction of family pension. The Post Master Amgaon was requested to send the particulars of actual payment of family pension to Smt. Saraswatabai. This Tribunal, at the admission hearing stage of this Original Application on 08.11.2006, directed the Welfare Officer to personally visit the applicant and the Sectional Personal Inspector at Gondhia and thereafter get the pension papers finalised and necessary payments be made within a period of two months thereafter. 2. By the order dated 08.11.2006 this Tribunal d...
Ganeshibai Alias Sunderibai Vs. the Union of India Through, General Ma ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-28-2014
(BOMBAY BENCH, MUMBAI, CAMP: NAGPUR) Chameli Majumdar, Member (J). 1. The applicant in this Original Application has challenged the communication addressed to Learned Advocate for the applicant dated 11.03.2008 whereby the claim of the applicant to be legally wedded wife of Late railway employee and her eligibility for family pension being a sole surviving legal heir was held to be doubtful. It was further mentioned in the said letter that the applicant tried to establish herself as legally wedded wife of Late railway employee through fraudulent means. Therefore, the applicant's claim for family pension was rejected by the said communication dated 11.03.2008. 2. Applicant has filed MA No.2087/2012 seeking condonation of delay. The alleged denial of pension is a continuing wrong and give rise to recurrent cause of action. Hence the MA No.2087/2012 for codonation of delay is allowed. 3. The fact of the case as stated by the applicant is that the applicant belongs to Tribal Community name...
Chhaboolal Dhurve Vs. Union of India Through Its General Manager, Bila ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-28-2014
(BOMBAY BENCH, MUMBAI, CAMP: NAGPUR) Chameli Majumdar, Member (J). 1. The applicant is the ex-railway employee, who has filed this O.A. for the following relief: "That the Honourabel Tribunal be pleased to pass an order to the respondents to release the Compassionate Allowances along with permissible allowances from date of removal (30.06.1995) of the applicant from service in the light of Railway Board's order No.F(E)III/2003/PN1/5 dated 04.11.2008 (Annexure A-1). Any other relief which the Honourable CAT deems fit to pass in form of pecuniary benefit." 2. The facts of the case, as made out by the applicant in the present O.A. are as follows: The applicant was working in the erstwhile South East Railway and now South East Central Railway. While working as Diesel Assistant (now Assistant Loco Pilot) he was charge sheeted for remaining unauthorizedly absent from duty. A disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him. He was removed from service w.e.f. 30.06.1995. The punishment order...
Abdhesh Kumar Vs. Union of India Through Its General Manager
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-28-2014
(BOMBAY BENCH, MUMBAI. CAMP: NAGPUR) Chameli Majumdar, Member (J). 1. The applicant is the ex-railway employee, who has filed this O.A. for the following relief : (8)1.1 to release the Compassionate Allowances along with permissible allowances from date of dismissal (12.07.1992) of the applicant from service in the light of Railway Board's order No.F(E)III/2003/PN1/5 dated 04.11.2008. 1.2 18% interest on payable sum from date of dismissal from service. 1.3 Costs 1.4 Any other relief which the Hon'ble CAT deems fit to pass in form of pecuniary benefit. 2. The facts of the case, as made out in the O.A., are as follows : "The applicant, while working as Khalasi Helper, was removed from service for remaining unauthorizedly absent without following the principles of natural justice by the Disciplinary Authority. The said order of removal was served on the applicant on 12.07.1992. The applicant challenged the removal order before the Appellate Authority but the said authority also held again...
indrapal N. Pazare and Others Vs. the Union of India, Represented Thro ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-28-2014
Dr. Mrutyunjay Sarangi, Member (A): 1. This Original Application No.404 of 2012 has been filed by Shri Indrapal N.Pazare and 19 others praying for setting aside the selection by the Indian Ordnance Factory, Chanda (Maharashtra) of 672 candidates for the post of Danger Building Workers (Semi Skilled) in short DBW (SS) vide its order No.2544/DR/TT/LB dated 23.06.2012 (Annexure A-1 to the OA) and 74 Examiners (SS) vide its order No.2544/DR/TT/MB dated 25.06.2012 (Annexure A-2 to the OA). 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: "The Respondents published an advertisement in Employment News on 30th July, 2011 -5th August, 2011 and invited applications for 25 categories of posts including D.B. Worker (SS) and Examiner (SS). The essential qualification for the posts of DBW (SS) was (i) matriculation passed or equivalent examination and (ii) the candidates must possess NCTVT certificate in the Trade Attendant Operator in Chemical Plant (AOCP) failing which ITI pass or equivalent Diploma...
Bhakta Bahadur and Others Vs. Inspector General of Prisons, State of G ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jan-27-2014
Smt. R.S. Dalvi, J. These writ petitions arise upon letters of three prisoners who have been convicted under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) and are serving their sentences. They challenge the deduction of 50% of the wages earned by them which have been appropriated to the Common Victims Compensation Fund, which has been created under Section 36-A of the Prisons Act, 1894, as amended by the Prisons (Goa Amendment) Act, 2005 and the Rules framed there-under being the Goa Prisons Rules, 2006. 2. One Tommy Thomas who was convicted under the NDPS Act was allowed the entire of the wages earned by him, without deducting any amount towards the Common Victims Compensation Fund. Thereafter, another prisoner also convicted under the NDPS Act, Basudev Joshi, was not allowed the entire wages. Fifty per cent of his wages came to be deducted under the aforesaid provision of the Act and the Rules. An order came to be passed by N.A. Britto, J., as he then was, on 24...
Jayesh Gopaldas Sampat and Others Vs. Paresh Satyendra Vohra and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-27-2014
G.S. Patel, J. 1. The suit is listed for exparte decree. The defendants were served on 21st September 2011. No written statement has been filed. None appears for the defendants. 2. Heard Mr. Naushad Engineer, learned Advocate for the plaintiffs. Perused the plaint. The Plaintiffs have tendered an affidavit of documents and a compilation, as also an affidavit in lieu of examination in chief of one Jayesh Gopaldas Sampat, the 1st plaintiff. Mr. Sampat is personally present in Court. He confirms the correctness of the statements made in the affidavit in lieu of examination in chief. The documents produced by him along with his affidavit of documents, and attested to in his affidavit in lieu of examination in chief are taken on record and marked Exhibit œP1? collectively. Plaintiffs shall file a compilation of photocopies of these documents within one week from today. This compilation shall be verified by the office and the original documents shall then be returned to the advocate fo...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »