Mumbai Court February 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.
SachIn Vs. Prashant Babarao Nagpure and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
Oral Judgment: This appeal is directed against the judgment and award passed on 26-11-2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Amravati in M.A.C.P. No. 99/2007. Facts leading to filing of this appeal may be stated briefly as under. 2. In the year 2006, the appellant was working as a Manager in Hotel Rimzim at Warud. On 28-11-2006, the appellant was returning home on his bicycle when one Maruti Van bearing registration no. MH-27-H-2131, being driven at very high speed, gave a dash to bicycle of the appellant. The appellant sustained grievous injuries and was admitted initially to Rural Hospital, Warud, then to Hope Hospital at Nagpur and finally to Medical College and Hospital, Nagpur. He was required to take long drawn treatment for the injuries suffered by him in the accident. According to him, accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of said vehicle by its driver, the respondent no.1. The vehicle was owned by respondent no. 2 and insured with respondent no.3 at t...
Dahiben Vasantkumar Patel and Others Vs. Dahiben Vasantkumar Patel and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
1. By this Chamber Summons, applicants seek condonation of delay of 140 days in filing caveat and affidavit in support of caveat. This Chamber Summons is opposed by the original petitioner by filing a detailed affidavit in reply. There is no rejoinder filed by the applicants. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this Chamber Summons are as under:- 2. On 22nd April, 2013 citations were received by the caveators at Canada. On 15th/25th June, 2013, Mrs.Dahiben Vasantkumar Patel who is one of the applicant and was served with citation executed a power of attorney in favour of Mr.Suchindra Bhawarlal Soni. Based on such power of attorney, on 4th July, 2013, the said constituted attorney filed caveat in this court on behalf of all the applicants. 3. On 4th July, 2013, applicants filed Chamber Summons (59 of 2013) in Petition No. 466 of 2010 inter alia praying for condonation of delay of 40 days in filing caveat. While opposing the said Chamber Summons No. 59 of 2013, the lea...
Mahaveer Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
S.S. Shinde, J. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-1, Beed in Sessions Case No. 90 of 2009 on 16/02/2010. The appellant herein, is the accused, who is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.300/-. In default of payment of fine, he shall undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. 2. The prosecution case, in nutshell, is as under: Accused Mahaveer s/o Anantrao Mahajan is a person belonging to Jain community. His first marriage was solemnized with one Archana Laxman Udapurkar resident of Karanja Lad, District Washim in the year 1994. Archana gave birth to a son by name Shubham out of said wedlock and said Shubham is taking education in Anath Ashram at Jalna. Archana died during her second delivery in the year 1997. Accused Mahaveer thereafter got married with deceased Pournima in the year 2002. Pournima b...
imram A. Ajij Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
Oral Judgment: (Anoop V. Mohta, J.) 1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader waives service for the Respondents. Heard finally by consent of parties. 2. The Petitioner has challenged impugned order dated 29 May 2013 passed by Respondent no.2, Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.1, Solapur, and also prayed to set aside order of termination dated 17 July 2013 passed by Respondent no.3. 3. The Petitioner belongs to œMuslim Julaha? caste which is recognised as O.B.C. in the State of Maharashtra. On his application, the Deputy Collector, Solapur, granted a Caste Certificate to the Petitioner after confirming the genuineness of the documents produced on 30 July 2009. The Petitioner based on the same applied for the post of Constable in the Department of Police from the reserved category of O.B.C. After passing all the tests, the Petitioner was recruited as Constable. Respondent no.3, the Commissioner of Police, Solapur, referred the Caste Certificate o...
Dr. Suvarna Arjun Jaybhaye Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
The petitioner is the accused in S.C.C. No. 965/2012 pending before the 3rd Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Beed. The said case is in respect of an offence punishable under section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The petitioner had made an application (Exhibit 14) before the Magistrate contending that there was no material in the charge-sheet to sustain the accusations, and that, she be, therefore, discharged. This application was opposed to by the Assistant Public Prosecutor, Incharge of the case. The learned Magistrate after hearing the parties rejected the said application, by an order dated 03.08.2013. By the present Petition, invoking the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and the inherent powers of this Court, the petitioner is praying that the said order passed by the learned Magistrate be quashed and set aside and any other just suitable and equitable order may be passed in favour of the petitioner. 2. The fa...
Vilas Kashinath Parab Vs. Nashiket Parab and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel. Learned Counsel for the respondents waive service. 2. The respondent/complainant has filed a criminal complaint no.376/P/2010/D in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class at Mapusa under Section 190(A) of Criminal Procedure Code, thereby praying that the petitioner/accused has committed offences of forgery, cheating and use of false document, thereby punishable under Sections 198, 465, 468 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. It is the case of the complainant that the petitioner, though was age-barred has fraudulently obtained the Government job by using false birth certificate, showing his age less. 3. The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class issued process under Section 198, 465, 468 and 420 of Indian Penal Code under Section 204 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The said order of issuance of process was challenged by the present petitioner in Criminal Revision Application No.52/2012, before the Addit...
Vinayak Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
V.M. Deshpande, J. 1. Appellant/original accused no.1, though was acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 504 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, is aggrieved by judgment and order of his conviction and sentence, dated 30.7.2011, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Beed, for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, by which the learned trial court directed the appellant to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for six months on that count. 2. Originally, in addition to the appellant, two other ladies, original accused no.2-Barkubai w/o Vinayak Pawar and original accused no.3- Barkubai w/o Baban Barde were also charged for commission of an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for committing murder of Sunita wife of the appellant and also they were charged for intentionally insulting Sunita and thereby giving provocation to her intending or know...
Goroba and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard. The appeal is admitted on 16.9.1997. The original claimants / appellants feel aggrieved by inadequate enhancement effected by the learned second Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad, in LAR No.141/1991 by order dated 7/7/1997, thereby awarding Rs.6,000/- per acre. 2. There is no controversy that agricultural property of the appellants 1 H. 96 R. forming small pieces situate at village Masla (Khurd) was subject of notification under Section 4 dated 22.9.1983 possession of which was taken on 25th April, 1985, and the Special Land Acquisition Officer declared the award on 30.12.1985, at the rate of Rs.2,000/- per acre. 3. Before the learned Judge, there were two land References; one of the appellants No. 141/1991 and another No.146/1991. 4. Feeling aggrieved by the award of Special Land Acquisition Officer Reference under Section 18 was moved to the learned Collector who transmitted it to the Court and the learned Reference Court awarded Rs.6,000/- per ac...
K. Ganeshan and Another Vs. Shambu D. Gauns and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr. Dessai, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Karpe, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By consent, heard forthwith. 3. By this petition, the petitioners have taken exception to the orders dated 16/12/2013 and 22/01/2014, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division at Pernem, Goa ('trial Court') in Regular Civil Suit No.17/2006. 4. The petitioners are the original plaintiffs whereas the respondents are the original defendants in the said Regular Civil Suit No.17/2006 pending before the learned trial Court. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as per their designation in the said suit. 5. The defendants have filed their written statement in the said suit thereby disputing the case of the petitioners. The defendants filed an application dated 21/11/2013 for amendment of the written statement. By order dated 16/12/2013, the learned trial Cou...
VipIn and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Off ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard learned Senior Counsel Shri Anil Mardikar for the applicants, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri P.V. Bhoyar for non-applicant No.1/State and learned Counsel Ms. S.R. Ashar for non-applicant No.2. 2. Admit. Heard finally by consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. 3. The applicants are accused in Criminal Complaint Case No.4 of 2007 in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagpur and are facing trial for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 504 and 506 Part-II of the Indian Penal Code. Applicant No.2 is wife of applicant No.1. Applicant No.1 is a Priest in New Life Christian Church and is a practising lawyer. Non-applicant No.2 Nisha Choudhary is the complainant in the said criminal case. The aggrieved party mainly appears to be the brother of the complainant namely Shekhar Manikrao Choudhary. The complainant/non-applicant No.2 filed criminal complaint before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate alleging...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »