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.
Chandrabhan Sukhadeo Sangle and Others Vs. Urban Development Departmen ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-20-2014
A.S. Oka, J. BASIC FACTS: 1. The Petitioners in these Writ Petitions are claiming that they were allotted self-contained residential flats by the State Government from the discretionary quota available to the Hon'ble Chief Minister of the State of Maharashtra. 2. As per the terms and conditions of the schemes sanctioned by the State Government under the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulations) Act, 1976 ( for short œthe ULC Act?) in relation to various properties in the Urban Agglomerations in the State, the State Government is entitled to receive certain residential flats. These flats form part of the discretionary quota available to the Hon'ble Chief Minister of the State of Maharashtra which is popularly known as œ5% quota?. Earlier it was known as œ10% quota?. Under the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976 ( for short œMHADA Act?), various boards have been established. In exercise of powers under the MHADA Act, the Maharashtra Hou...
Kalawati Vs. Nagpur Improvement Trust, Through Its Chairman and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Mar-20-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard by consent of learned counsel appearing for rival parties. 2. This second appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 27.6.2012, passed by the learned District Judge-3, Nagpur, in Regular Civil Appeal No.170 of 2010, whereby the appeal was allowed in following terms, thus: ORDER I) The appeal is hereby allowed. II) The judgment and order passed on 25.1.2010 by the learned trial Court in RCS No.7/2009 is hereby quashed and set aside. II) The respondent-plaintiff to pay the costs of the appeal to the appellants. IV) A decree be drawn up accordingly. V) Dictated and delivered in open Court. The said appeal arose from judgment and order dated 25.1.2010, passed by the learned Fourth Joint Civil Judge Junior Division, Nagpur, in Regular Civil Suit No.7 of 2009, which was decreed. 3. It appears that the first appellate Court decided to reverse the decree which was granted in favour of the plaintiff “ appellant, whereby it was held that the application for...
Kashi Dairy and Restaurant Vs. Peter Tellis and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-20-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr. Vengurlekar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. 2. The above appeal challenges the judgment dated 26.09.2007 passed by the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Vasco, whereby a suit filed by the appellant for damages came to be dismissed. 3. Mr. Vengurlekar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has assailed the impugned judgment on the ground that though the evidence on record discloses that the respondent no.4 who is a practicing advocate was present at the time of the morcha nevertheless, the learned Judge has erroneously refused the damages claimed by the appellant. The learned counsel further pointed out that the appellant was falsely implicated in an allegation of rape against the victim who was working at the relevant time in the establishment of the appellant. The learned counsel further pointed out that the respondents with a common intention illegally organized the morcha and trespassed into the suit premises of the appellant thereb...
Dr. Aspi S. Golwala and Others Vs. Bai Ratanbai and Behramji Kuka Co-o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-20-2014
P.C. : 1. The Notice of Motion is taken out by the Plaintiffs, who are trustees of two public charitable trusts, for a temporary injunction to restrain Defendant No.1 society from transferring 60 flats referred to in the plaint without the consent of the Trust. 2. Plaintiff Nos.1 to 4 are trustees of Seth Behramji Ferdunji Kuka and Bai Ratanbai Behramji Kuka Charity Trust (œKuka Trust?), whilst Plaintiff No.5 is the sole trustee of Bai Hirabai Manchersha Gilder Charity Trust (œGilder Trust?). Trustees of Gilder Trust were owners of a plot of land admeasuring about 3430 sq. yards at Andheri in Mumbai, and by an agreement for sale dated 20 February 1989 agreed to sell to the trustees of Kuka Trust the said land for a price of Rs.2 lakh. The purchasers, in turn, agreed to construct a building/buildings in the land for low income group Parsis. There were restrictions as to the area and price of flats to be constructed in the building/s. The area of the flats was not to exceed 3...
Prabhakar Sakharam Patnekar Vs. Dy. Collector (L.A) and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-20-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. This appeal arises out of the Award passed by the learned Ad-hoc District Judge, Fast Track Court- 3, Mapusa in Land Acquisition Case No.19/2006 in reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. 2. The relevant facts are: The Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was published on 7/4/2003 for acquisition of various lands including the land which is the subject matter of the present appeal. The Land Acquisition Officer had awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.30/- per sq.metre. The appellant being dis-satisfied had filed reference and claimed that he is entitled for compensation at the rate of Rs.305/- per sq.metre. The Reference Court considered the matter and rejected the claim of the appellant mainly on the ground that the acquired land is within the set back area of the State Highway and unfit for construction. In view of this, the Reference Court did not consider the sale instances in respect of the properties which accord...
Tukaram Tulsiram Pawar (Convict No.7542) Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-20-2014
Oral Judgment: (P.V. Hardas, J.) 1. This Appeal has been filed after a delay of four years and 329 days challenging the judgment of the Ad Hoc Additional Sessions Judge-1, Nashik dated 2 February 2009 convicting the Appellant / original accused No.1 for offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. We therefore admit the Appeal and hear the Appeal forthwith. 2. It appears that original accused No.2 Tulshiram, father of the Appellant had filed Criminal Appeal 777 of 2011 challenging his conviction and sentence. The Division Bench of this Court by judgment dated 7 January 2014 allowed the Appeal. The Appellant had not filed an Appeal and the Appeal of the Appellant was filed after the judgment in Criminal Appeal 777 of 2011. In that light of the matter therefore, since the co-accused has been acquitted on the basis of the same evidence, as the evidence against the Appellant, we consider it appropriate to decide this Appeal at this stage. The record and proce...
Dr. Arvind Vishnu Patankar Vs. University Grants Commission and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-20-2014
A.K. Menon, J. 1. The petitioner prays for a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate direction to quash and set aside the orders declining to grant pension benefits by Western Regional Instrumentation Center and for direction to any of the four respondents, namely, University Grants Commission, State of Maharashtra, University of Mumbai and Wester Regional Instrumentation Centre, Mumbai to apply the service rules and direct the respondents to release and pay pension with effect from 1st July, 1992 when the petitioner attained superannuation and also to recover employees contribution fund paid to the petitioner at the time of superannuation from the arrears of pension and continue to pay the pension in respect of the service rendered for Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (T.I.R.F.) and Western Regional Instrumentation Center (WRIC). 2. It is necessary to briefly deal with the facts before dealing with the petition as under:- The Petitioner holds a PH.D. in Solid State Physics. In...
Dr. Narote Amol Sadashivrao and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ot ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-20-2014
Oral Judgment: (Anoop V. Mohta, J.) 1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Learned counsel appearing for the respective Respondents waive service. Heard finally, by consent of the parties, in view of urgency expressed by all, as the issues relate to the admission of Post Graduate course in Medicine for the year 2014-2015. 2. The relevant information of the Rule is as under:- œ1.2 This procedure will be called as œProcedure for selection and admission to medical post-graduate courses at the State Government Medical Colleges, Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation Medical Colleges, Central Government Institutions like Tata Memorial Hospital and all other Private Medical Colleges/Institutions who opt for admission to PG courses through PGM-CET 2014.? The relevant rules of Post-Graduate seat distribution are as under:- œ7.1 The seats available for admission to medical postgraduate courses will be distributed as 50% to all India Quota and remaining 50% to the State Quota. From the Sta...
Peeraji and Others Vs. Hariba and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-20-2014
Judgment : 1. The appeal is filed against judgment and decree of Regular Civil Appeal No. 191/1984 which was pending in the Court of Additional District Judge, Latur. The appeal of the present respondent against the judgment and decree of Regular Civil Suit No. 157/1979 decided by Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Latur is decided in favour of the respondent. The relief of specific performance of contract and permanent injunction are granted to the respondent by the First Appellate Court. Both the sides are heard. 2. The respondent (plaintiff) had filed suit in respect of agricultural land bearing Gat (Block) No. 141 and 153 situated at Ankoli, Tahsil and District Latur. The area of first land is 5 Acres 35 Gunta and area of second land is 4 Acres 10 Gunta. It is the case of plaintiff that defendant - Peeraji was in need of money and so, he agreed to sell the suit property to plaintiff for consideration of Rs. 12,500/-. It is contended that on 25.12.1978 the agreement was written and...
M/S. Aarti Infra-projects Pvt.Ltd. and Others Vs. M/S S.P.Fabritech, T ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Mar-20-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. This second appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 24.2.2014, passed by the learned District Jude-12, Nagpur, in Regular Civil Appeal No.191 of 2013, whereby the appeal was dismissed, which arose from judgment and order dated 25.2.2013, passed by the learned Third Joint Civil Judge Junior Division, Nagpur, in Regular Civil Suit No.58 of 2011, which was decreed in the sum of Rs.4,80,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of suit till realization of amount from defendant Nos.1 to 8 who were held jointly and severally liable to pay the decreetal amount to the plaintiff. 2. It appears that the decree was based upon the negotiable instrument in the form of Cheque bearing No.153009 dated 3.3.2009 drawn on ICICI Bank Ltd., Ramdaspeth Branch, Nagpur whereby sum of Rs.4,80,000/- was payable to the plaintiff. This cheque was presented for encashment with ICICI Bank Ltd., Ramdaspeth Branch, Nagpur. The said cheque was dishonoured and returned...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »