Mumbai Court March 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.
Tulsiram and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra, Ministry of Social Welfa ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
Oral Judgment: (B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.) 1. By this petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-employee seeks a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant pension and other retiral benefits in accordance with the Government Schemes and Rules framed there-under. The prayers have been amended on 14th July 2011 and the relief of quashing and setting aside G.R. dated 1st February 1984 has been sought. By another prayer added on 17th October 2006, in alternative direction is sought to extend said G.R. dated 1st February 1984 to the Workshop of respondent No.4. On 22nd November 2013 one Preranalaya (Sheltered Workshop Section) Home for Aged and Handicapped Association and Sandhi Niketan Apangachi Karmashala Employees Association have been added as petitioners. 2. The facts show that petitioner No.1 worked as Watchman from 1st March 1965 in the Sheltered Workshop Section of Home for Aged and Handicapped school run for special children by respondent ...
Sikandar Axamani Vs. State of Goa, as Represented by Officer-in-charge
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
1. Heard Mr. Zaveri, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant under Legal Aid Scheme and Mrs. Pinto, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 24/05/2010, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge- I, Panaji, (trial Judge) in Sessions Case No. 20 of 2007. 3. A charge sheet was filed by Ponda Police before the learned J.M.F.C. Ponda against the appellant (Accused) for offence punishable under section 286 of Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) read with section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 (the Act). Since the offence punishable under Section 5 of the Act was triable exclusively by the Sessions Court, the case was committed to the Sessions Court at Panaji. Charge was framed and explained to the accused, who pleaded not guilty. 4. The charge against the accused was that on 25/01/2006 at 12.30 hours at Naga Masjid Ponda, he negligently handled explosives in the rented room ...
Bablusing @ Jabeersingh Vs. Darbarsingh
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
1) The revision is admitted. By consent, notice after admission made returnable forthwith. Both sides heard for final disposal. 2) The proceeding is filed against the order made by the learned 8th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nanded on Exhibit 65 in Regular Civil Suit No.515 of 2007. The suit is filed by present respondent against the applicants for relief of injunction. Present applicants filed Written Statement and then filed application at Exhibit 65 for dismissal of the suit or alternatively for staying the suit. It is the case of the applicants that in the past, present respondent, plaintiff, had filed Regular Civil Suit No.449 of 2001 in respect of the same subject matter for relief of injunction against Smt. Kusumtai Kagne. This suit came to be dismissed on 22-1-2009. Against this decision respondent preferred Regular Civil Appeal No.35 of 2009 in District Court and the appeal is still pending. It is the case of the applicants that in view of these circumstances, Regular ...
Pramukh Closures Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Deora Associates, Partnership Firm and ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr. Silva, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant/appellant and Mr. Zaveri, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents no. 4 and 5. 2. Leave is granted to file the appeal against the impugned order. Criminal Misc. Application No. 207/2011 stands disposed of accordingly. Registry to register the appeal, forthwith. 3. The appeal stands admitted. 4. Mr. Zaveri, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents no. 4 and 5 waives service of notice on behalf of the said respondents, after admission. By consent heard forthwith. 5. It is seen that when the impugned order was passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Margao (trial magistrate), the other respondents, namely respondents no. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 (accused nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7) were not served. In the circumstances above, there is no need to send notices of the present appeal to the said respondents (accused persons). 6. By this appeal, the appellant, who is the compla...
Dattaguru Amonkar Vs. Kala Academy Goa, Through Its Member Secretary a ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
Oral Judgment: (Z. A. Haq, J.) 1. Heard Mr. Supekar, learned Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Salkar, learned Government Advocate for respondent nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. S. D. Lotlikar, learned Senior Counsel with Ms. M. Furtado, learned Advocate for respondent no.3. 2. The petitioner takes exception to the Recruitment Rules which according to the petitioner are illegally modified in 2006 and because of which his entitlement for the promotion to the post of Programme and Development Officer (in short 'PDO') is affected. The case of the petitioner is that in 2004 when the post of PDO had fallen vacant no candidate from the feeder cadre was eligible for that post and, therefore, the respondent no.3 Dr. Kale, was given an additional charge of PDO for a period of two years. Mr. Supekar, learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the resolution by which Dr. Kale was given an additional charge makes a specific reference to the fact that the candidate eligible for the post pf PDO wou...
Marine Geotechnics Llc Vs. Coastal Marine Construction and Engineering ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
G.S. Patel, J. 1. Is an ex-parte default summary judgment obtained in a non-reciprocating foreign country against an Indian company a debt due and payable by it within the meaning of Section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956? This is the issue in this winding up petition. 2. The petitioner, Marine Geotechnics LLC (œMarine Geotechnics?) is an American company. It has its headquarters in Houston, Texas. It brought suit against the respondent-Company, Coastal Marine Construction and Engineering Ltd. (œCoastal Marine?) in the United State District Court, Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. Marine Geotechnics filed a Motion for Entry of Default Judgment against Coastal Marine and three others. On 18 January 2011, the US District Court granted Marine Geotechnics motion and entered default judgment against Coastal Marine and one of the other defendants. A copy of that opinion/judgment is annexed to the affidavit in rejoinder. The order is composite. Against two other def...
Dattatraya Shrirang Desai Vs. State of Maharashtra, Through Bhivandi P ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
A.S. Gadkari, J. 1. The Appellant, original accused, has questioned the correctness of his conviction and sentence by the present Appeal, thereby challenging the judgment and order dated 19 April 2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Thane in Sessions Case No.379 of 2006, convicting the Appellant for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. The facts which emerged from the record and which can be summarized briefly be stated thus: (a) P.W.9 Mira Bhoite heard some commotion outside her house at about 6.30 a.m. on 17 July 2006 and when she opened the door, she saw that Lata was shouting for help and calling her mother. She further saw that Lata was lying on the road. P.W.9 Mira noticed that Lata was in injured condition. P.W.9 Mira thereafter went to see Lata near the spot. At that time Lata was calling Mu...
Kandra Rameshbabu Naidu Vs. Superintendent (A.E.) Service Tax, Mumbai ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
Oral Order: 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant. Also heard the learned Special Counsel for the respondent No.1. Also heard the learned APP for the respondent No.2. 2. Present application for bail is preferred by the applicant in the matter of offence punishable under Section 89 read with Section 90 of the Finance Act, 1994. 3. During the arguments it is submitted on behalf of the applicant that he is the Director of M/s. Prashant Transport Exchange Division, and the Managing Director of M/s. Naidu's Infracon Private Limited. He was arrested on 22nd January, 2014 at 9:00 p.m. under Section 89 read with Section 90 of the Finance Act, 1994 for non-payment of Service Tax for the period from 2010 to December, 2013. 4. Prior to discussing the rival submissions, the factual position is required to be mentioned inasmuch as the applicant had collected Rs.2.59 Cores of Service Tax during the period 2010-2011 to 2013-2014 but had not deposited the said amount except Rs.15 Lakhs. The a...
Milagres Sales Coutinho Vs. Maria Angelica Da Costa and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. By this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 22.06.2012, passed by the Ad-hoc District Judge-1, Margao in Regular Civil Appeal No. 34 of 2011, dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant against the judgment and decree dated 06.12.2010 passed in Special Civil Suit No. 125/2007 by Civil Judge, Junior Division, Margao thereby, dismissing the suit of the appellant brought for recovery of money due under a mortgage. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are as under:- The suit was filed by the appellant against the respondents for recovery of money, which was based upon the right acquired by him in a transfer of mortgage, by the original mortgagee, Dr. Francisco da Piedade Abranches. It is the case of the appellant that he was entitled to recover the money due in this mortgage from the respondents. The trial Court framed four issues and answered three issues in favour of the appellant and dismissed the suit by recording a negative finding on th...
Corporation of the City of Panaji, by Its Commissioner Vs. the Deputy ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
1. By order dated 06/03/2013, notices were issued to the respondents by putting the parties to notice that the petition may be disposed of finally at the stage of admission. 2. Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of all the parties. 3. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent heard forthwith. 4. By this petition, the petitioner has taken exception to the award dated 27/02/2012 passed by respondent no.1 in Case No. XVI(6)DC(LA)/2008 and has prayed for a consequent direction to respondents no. 3 to 6 to return the money received by them under the impugned award with interest at the rate of 15 % p.a. 5. An area of 3000 square metres comprised in a quarry, falling in R-Zone, at Dona Paula and located opposite the British Cemetery, from Chalta No. 1(P) of P.T. Sheet No. 188 of City Survey, Panaji, recorded in the name of respondent no. 6, was notified by Government under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ('the Act' for short) for sanitary land fill site at Panaji for...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »