Mumbai Court December 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.
M/s. Akola Oil Industries Limited â In Liquidation
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-20-2014
Oral Order: 1. These reports are filed by the Official Liquidator appointed over M/s. Akola Oil Industries Ltd. for confirmation of auction sale held on 9-11-2012, as per the notice issued pursuant to an order dated 13-4-2012 passed by this Court. The advertisement contained invitation of bids for 39 properties on as is where is basis and as is whatever basis. In the auction conducted on 9-11-2012, the highest bids in respect of all the properties are accepted, subject to confirmation of sale by this Court in terms of the order dated 13-4-2012. 2. On 15-2-2013, this Court passed an order as under: For the reasons stated in the report the highest bidders are required to deposit the balance amount of the bid price. The O.L.R., therefore, to issue the communication to each of the bidder on the address given by him specifying the exact amount which is required to be deposited. Upon receipt of such notice/intimation in writing, the bidders shall deposit the amount to specified in the notice...
Rajendra Antharam Tijoriwala and Gujrathi Vs. Takhatmal Shrivallabh Ch ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-20-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Shri P.Y. Deshpande, the learned advocate for the petitioner and Shri J.J. Chandurkar, the learned advocate for the respondent no.1. None appears for the other respondents though served. 2. The petition is by the tenant challenging the judgment passed by the District Court granting decree for possession and ancillary reliefs in favour of the respondents. 3. Though it is debatable as to whether the impugned judgment and decree can be challenged in revision or in writ petition, as the writ petition is admitted and is pending for final hearing since 2005, I have taken up the petition for final hearing without delving into the issue. 4. Shri Ramratan Shrivallabh Chandak the owner of the suit property had filed proceedings under clause 13(3)(vii) of the C.P. and Berar Letting of Premises and Rent Control Order, 1949 (for short Rent Control order 1949) seeking permission of the Rent Controller to issue notice terminating the tenancy of the petitioner tenant. The Rent ...
Lal Zenda Coal Mines Mazdoor Union, (CITU) through its General Secreta ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-20-2014
A.B. Chaudhari, J. 1. Writ Petition No. 2296/1998 was called out for hearing on 10.11.2014 and none remained present for the petitioner while Mr. S. C. Mehadia, Advocate represented respondent-WCL. The question arising in the petition being of substantial importance, this Court decided writ petition on merit and dismissed it on 10.11.2014 itself, but reasons were to follow. Thereafter, it was brought to our notice that Writ Petition Nos.1181/1997, 1190/1997 and 2249/1998, in which same question is involved, are also pending for final hearing. Therefore, we decided to hear these three writ petitions and then record our reasons for deciding all these cases together. Accordingly, Mr. P. D. Meghe and Mr. B. Lahiri, Advocates for the petitioners, were heard in these three writ petitions on 11.12.2014. 2. In Writ Petition Nos.2296/1998 and 2249/1998, the petitioner-Lal Zenda Coal Mines Mazdoor Union (CITU) and its General Secretary Mohd. Tajuddin s/o Late Mohd. Haneef-petitioner no.2 had, ch...
Shree Tukai Devi Trust and Others Vs. Shri Nivrutti P. Mujumle and Oth ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-20-2014
1. Admit. Respondents waive notice. By consent, the appeal is heard and decided finally at the admission stage. 2. Though it is a First Appeal, under Bombay Public Trusts Act, it is to be considered in the form of Second Appeal. In this Appeal, substantial questions of law is formulated as follows: i) Whether the decision of the Court violates the Doctrine of Proportionality? Though only one substantial question of law is framed, the learned Senior Counsel for the appellants argued and suggested more substantial questions of law which were not accepted but only one is framed as a substantial question of law. Before dealing with the said question of law, his submissions are taken into account. 3. Appellant No.1 is a Trust in the name of goddess 'Tukai'. The Trust owns immovable property i.e., a temple and land admeasuring 2 to 3 acres. The families of the appellants are appointed as Trustees and they are also 'Pujaris' known as 'Gurav'. Since nearly 100 years they are offering services ...
The State of Maharashtra Vs. Pratapsing Kalyansingh and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Dec-19-2014
S.S. Shinde, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the State of Maharashtra, aggrieved by judgment and order passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded on 30th August, 1995, thereby acquitting the Respondents for the offence punishable under section 307 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under: (i) That, the complainant Vandanabai w/o Satyanarayan Thakur is the resident of Gadipura, Renuka Mandir, Nanded. Vandana has two sons namely Dhanraj and Dhanprakash. She has one daughter by name Rajkumari. Vandana's husband Satyanarayan is electrician by profession and does the work of repair of fans and electric motors. At the time of incident, Vandana was residing with her husband and children in the house in Gadipura area. Satyanarayan has two married sisters namely Vimalbai and Karunabai. (ii) Accused and complainant Vandana at the relevant time were residing in the same Wada situated at Gadipura. Accused Nos.2, 4, 5 and 6 are the sons of accuse...
Anil Harishchandra Kadu Vs. The Additional Commissioner, Amravati Divi ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-19-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. Heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. This writ petition takes exception to the order dated 30-8-2013 passed by respondent No.2 thereby dismissing the appeal preferred by the petitioner under provisions of Section 318 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (for short the said Act). Said appeal had been preferred by the petitioner challenging communication dated 7-9-2012 issued by respondent No.2 Chief Officer whereby the petitioner was informed that the permission granted to him to undertake newspaper reporting had been cancelled. 3. The petitioner is employed as an Assistant Teacher with the respondent No.2 Municipal Council. According to the petitioner, he was interested in journalism. He, therefore, initially sought permission from the Municipal Council to undertake newspaper journalism by application dated 28-11-1989. The Municipal Council through its Chief Officer gran...
Rajesh Madhukar Pandit and Others Vs. The Nashik Municipal Corporation ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-19-2014
A.S. Oka, J. 1. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties on grant of further interim reliefs in the context of four compliance reports placed on record by the Committee appointed by this Court under the Chairmanship of the Divisional Commissioner as well as in the context of the final report submitted by the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI). Another related issue canvassed is as regards the progress made in the matter of acquisition of lands for Gangapur STP and PimpalgaonKhamb STP. The other aspect on which parties are heard is as regards the action plan of Simhastha Kumbh Mela to be held in Nashik between July, 2015 to August, 2016. Another issue is regarding the allocation of funds for the Kumbh Mela and the release of funds by the Government of India for the purposes of Kumbh Mela. There were some submissions made on the implementation of the interim directions of this Court. The submissions made will have to be appreciated in the lig...
Fazal Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Dec-19-2014
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard both the sides by consent for final disposal. 2. The present proceeding is filed under Chapter XXV of the Code of Criminal Procedure and under section 482 of the Code to challenge the order made by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.300/2013 on Exhibit 7. The application at Exhibit 7 was filed under section 330 of the Code and it was contended that the applicant is of unsound mind and so he needs to be released on bail for giving him proper treatment and for keeping him in proper and safe custody. It appears that the learned Judge of the trial Court made an order of medical examination of the accused through the Medical Board at Nagpur. The learned Judge of the trial Court has considered that report. However, the learned Judge has made some observations with regard to few facts noticed by the predecessor of the trial Court to the effect that the predecessor had made some inquiry with the accused in jail and he did no...
The Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Vandan ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-18-2014
Oral Judgment:1. In Motor Accident Claim Petition No.65 of 2003 filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the appellant-Insurance Company, along with the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle, i.e. Tractor bearing registration No.MH-30/E-7161, and Trailer bearing registration No.MH-30/E-2846, has been held jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation of Rs.2,75,000/- with proportionate costs and 9% per annum interest from the date of the petition till the payment is made in full to the claimant Nos.1 to 6 and 8. The Insurance Company has, therefore, preferred this appeal claiming exoneration from the liability of payment of compensation on the defence that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding the effective driving licence, as contemplated by Section 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act.2. The factual position is as under:The accident in question occurred on 20-1-2003, and as a result of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle, the husban...
Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Urmila wd/o H ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-18-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Admit. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties. 2. In Claim Petition No.84 of 2005 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur, has passed an award on 26-8-2002, holding the appellant-Insurance Company along with the respondent Nos.2 and 3 therein, who are the owner and driver of the offending vehicle, jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation of Rs.3,85,000/- with interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till its realization. The Insurance Company is before this Court in this first appeal. 3. The Tribunal has held that the Insurance Company has failed to establish its defence that the policy in question was only an Act policy and it did not cover the risk of the pillion rider, who died in the accident. Shri Joharapurkar, the learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company, has invited my attention to the cover note at Exhibit 33 plac...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »