Mumbai Court March 2014 Judgments
Deutsche Bank Ag. Vs. Finolex Industries Limited
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-28-2014
G.S. Patel, J. I. Overview 1. Deutsche Bank AG, the petitioner (œDeutsche Bank?), claims that an amount of US$ 21,001,543.71 (plus interest) is due to it as of 1st May 2010 from the respondent, Finolex Industries Ltd (œFinolex?) under a derivative transaction. This transaction is said to accord with a 2002 ISDA Master Agreement, one that is incorporated by reference. 2. Finolexinter alia manufactures PVC resin. For this, it needs various chemicals that it must import as these are not locally available. The value of its annual imports range between US$ 100“200 million. Finolex pays for its imports in US dollars. Resultantly, its rupee import cost depends on the dollar-rupee (USD/INR) exchange rate at any given time. Finolexs purchases are also on credit, often for up to as much as year from the supply date. The raw material price is pegged (in US dollars) at the time the order is placed. Since Finolex makes actual payment at a later date, the rupee amount it uses in pa...
Tag this Judgment!Anthony Sebastian Afonso, (Since Deceased) by His Legal Heirs: and Oth ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-28-2014
1. Heard Mr. Usgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and Mr. Ferreira, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. This Second Appeal is directed against the judgment, order and decree dated 28/03/2012 passed by the learned District Judge-II, South Goa Margao (First Appellate Court) in Regular Civil Appeal No. 280 of 2010 and Judgment, order and Decree dated 30/04/2001 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Margao (Trial Court) in Special Civil suit No. 189/1987/A. 3. The appellants were plaintiffs and the respondents were defendants in the said Special Civil Suit No. 189/1987/A. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to as per their status in the said special suit. 4. The plaintiffs had filed the said suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,41,150/- with interest at the rate of 18% per annum, with effect from the date of filing of the suit till the date of recovery. 5. Case of the plaintiffs, in short, was as follows: The original pl...
Tag this Judgment!Vasant Tukaram Prabhu Vs. Xalinibai Borcar alias Smt. Shalinibai Borka ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-28-2014
1. This appeal is filed against the order of remand dated 16.7.2013 made by the District Judge-I North Goa, at Panaji in Regular Civil Appeal No. 339 of 2010 filed by the respondents nos. 1(a) to 1(j) against the judgment and decree dated 30.4.2001, passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Ponda, dismissing the Special Civil Suit No. 21/1984/A filed by them against the appellant and respondent no. 2. 2. The appellant is the original defendant no.1. Respondent nos.1(a) to 1(j) are the legal representatives of original plaintiff and respondent no. 2 is the original defendant no.2. 3. Parties to the appeal are hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs and defendants in the order they have been impleaded in the suit. 4. The original plaintiff, Smt. Shalinibai Borkar contended that she was the owner in possession of the suit property known as œBorodo Dongrachem Advona?, also known as œAforamento? situated at Nirancal in Ponda Taluka, described in the Land Registration Office ...
Tag this Judgment!Peter John D'Souza and Others Vs. Armstrong Joseph D'souza
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-28-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Both these petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Both these petitions are filed under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short, œthe Act?) for setting aside the grant of letters of administration issued by this Court on 31-3-2011 in Petition No.722 of 2010 in favour of the respondent on various grounds. 3. The petitioners in both the petitions claim certain rights in respect of few properties described in the Schedule appended to the petition for letters of administration filed by the respondent in this Court in respect of the estate of deceased Triza Domnic D'souza. The respondent claims to be the grandson of the said deceased. 4. Both the petitioners have urged before this Court that the grant obtained by the respondent is liable to be revoked on the just cause under Section 263(a), (b) and (c) r/w Illustrations (v) and (vi) to Section 263 of the Act. Mr. Korde, learned senior counsel appearing for th...
Tag this Judgment!The Chief Executive Officer, Goa State Co-operative Bank Ltd. and Anot ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-28-2014
1. The appeal arises out of the Judgment and Decree passed by the learned Adhoc District Judge-I, Fast Track at Panaji in Civil Suit No.304/2004 on 30/7/2008, by which the civil suit filed by the original plaintiffs is partly decreed and it is declared that the Deed of Mortgage dated 4/2/1991 executed by the original defendants no.1,2,6 and 7 and the award passed by the Deputy Registrar of Co- operative Societies, Panaji, in Case no. ABN/DRCS/31/95 on 26/12/1995 and the auction proceedings dated 2/4/1998 and the Certificate of Sale dated 29/10/1998 are null and void abi-initio. By the impugned Judgment and Decree it is directed that the Sub Registrar of Registration should cancel the registration of the Deed of Mortgage dated 4/2/1991. This appeal is filed by (i) The Chief Executive Officer, Goa State Co-operative Bank Ltd. and (ii) the Branch Manager, Goa State Co- operative Bank Ltd., who were the original defendants no.6 and 7. 2. The relevant facts necessary for consideration of th...
Tag this Judgment!Tikkamchand Ramvilas Gilda and Another Vs. Jankibai Pyarelal Shrivas a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-28-2014
1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree passed on 25.9.2001 by the Joint District Judge, Amravati in Regular Civil Appeal No.21/1995 filed against the judgment and decree passed on 26.10.1994 in Regular Civil Suit No.402/1990 by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati, thereby dismissing the appeal and confirming the decree passed by the trial Court. 2. The appellant is the grand daughter in law of the original plaintiff to whom the suit property, which is a shop situated in a building popularly known as Mathuradas building, Amravati, was bequeathed by the original plaintiff. Deceased respondent nos.1 and 2 were original defendant nos.1 and 2 and remaining respondents were substituted as defendant nos. 3(1) to 3(4) after the original defendant no.3. Nandalal Pyarelal Shrivas died during the pendency of the suit, they being legal representatives in the capacity as widow and children of said Nandalal respectively. For the sake of convenience, the parties here...
Tag this Judgment!Firoz Mohammed Ali Aga Vs. State of Goa, Through Learned P.P.
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-28-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr. Singh, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Ms. Pinto, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent. 2. This Revision Application has been filed against the Judgment and Order dated 07/01/2013 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Margao (Appellate Court) in Criminal Appeal No. 83 of 2011 by which the judgment and sentence dated 26th/29th August, 2011 delivered by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Vasco-da-Gama (Trial Magistrate) in Criminal Case No. 84/S/2010/D has been confirmed and the present petitioner, who was the accused in the said case, has been directed to surrender and suffer the imprisonment imposed against him and to pay the fine as ordered or to suffer further imprisonment in default. 3. The Vasco Police had filed charge sheet against the accused for offence punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.), alleging that on 05/03/2010 at 11.50 hours near Vadd...
Tag this Judgment!Vasant Tukaram Prabhu Vs. Xalinibai Borcar alias Smt. Shalinibai Borka ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-28-2014
1. This appeal is filed against the order of remand dated 16.7.2013 made by the District Judge-I North Goa, at Panaji in Regular Civil Appeal No. 339 of 2010 filed by the respondents nos. 1(a) to 1(j) against the judgment and decree dated 30.4.2001, passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Ponda, dismissing the Special Civil Suit No. 21/1984/A filed by them against the appellant and respondent no. 2. 2. The appellant is the original defendant no.1. Respondent nos.1(a) to 1(j) are the legal representatives of original plaintiff and respondent no. 2 is the original defendant no.2. 3. Parties to the appeal are hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs and defendants in the order they have been impleaded in the suit. 4. The original plaintiff, Smt. Shalinibai Borkar contended that she was the owner in possession of the suit property known as œBorodo Dongrachem Advona?, also known as œAforamento? situated at Nirancal in Ponda Taluka, described in the Land Registration Office ...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Lok Holdings and Constructions Ltd. and Others Vs. Municipal Corp ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-28-2014
1. By this Chamber Summons in execution application the applicants seek dispensation with notice under order 21 rule 22 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with High Court (O.S.) Rules 316 and 317 of High Court (Original Side) Rules and seeks an order and directions against the Municipal Corporation and its officers (respondent nos.1 to 4) to decide the application dated 29th February, 2012 made by the applicant no.1 or in the alternative to appoint a fit and proper person/officer with all powers duties and functions of the Executive Engineer and Ward Officer as per Rules and as per Development Control Regulations Greater Mumbai, 1991 to decide in accordance with the order dated 10th August, 2011 passed by the Division Bench the application dated 29th February, 2012 made by the applicant no.1. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this execution application and the chamber summons are as under:- 2. On 11th June, 2010, the Executive Engineer, Building Proposal issued a not...
Tag this Judgment!Tikkamchand Ramvilas Gilda and Another Vs. Jankibai Pyarelal Shrivas a ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Mar-28-2014
1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree passed on 25.9.2001 by the Joint District Judge, Amravati in Regular Civil Appeal No.21/1995 filed against the judgment and decree passed on 26.10.1994 in Regular Civil Suit No.402/1990 by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati, thereby dismissing the appeal and confirming the decree passed by the trial Court. 2. The appellant is the grand daughter in law of the original plaintiff to whom the suit property, which is a shop situated in a building popularly known as Mathuradas building, Amravati, was bequeathed by the original plaintiff. Deceased respondent nos.1 and 2 were original defendant nos.1 and 2 and remaining respondents were substituted as defendant nos. 3(1) to 3(4) after the original defendant no.3. Nandalal Pyarelal Shrivas died during the pendency of the suit, they being legal representatives in the capacity as widow and children of said Nandalal respectively. For the sake of convenience, the parties here...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »