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.
Amboo Salim Abdul Bari Siddiqui and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-19-2014
Oral Judgment: (Anoop V. Mohta, J.) 1. Heard, finally by consent of all the parties. 2. All these Petitions can be disposed of, as the issues' involve are common and interconnected and revolving around Public Interest Litigation No.140 of 2006 (JanhitManch and ors vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.) and order passed therein from time to time, apart from the orders in other connected matters. 3. The basic order dated 14 October 2009, whereby it is recorded as under:- We passed the order on 29.7.2009 and appointed a Committee headed by the Chief Secretary of the State. It is not disputed that the pipes carrying water from the source to Mumbai citizens are more than hundred years old, and they carry water for 160 kilometers. The Ninety kilometers of the pipes are over the ground and sixty kilometers are underground. There are hutments constructed by illegal encroachers in an around the pipes. Apparently, there is threat to the security as well to the health of the citizens of Mumbai. Accor...
Dr. Sadanand Madhukar Ingle Vs. Maharashtra Medical Council and Anothe ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Mar-19-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule, made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties. 2. The challenge in this petition is to the order dated 26122013 passed by the Maharashtra Medical Council, Mumbai (for short, œthe said Council?), in exercise of its power conferred by Section 22 of the Maharashtra Medical Council Act, 1965 (for short, œthe said Act?), suspending the registration of the petitioner as a medical practitioner. The order suspending the registration, is reproduced below : œTo, Dr. Sadanand Madhukar Ingle, Ingle Hospital Nandura Road, Sant Tukaram Nagar, Khamgaon444 303. Sub.: SUSPENSION OF REGISTRATION NO.56463 Ref.No. RCC Case No.119/2011 and 02/2012 under PCPNDT Act. On behalf of the Maharashtra Medical Council, the Registrar, upon receiving the copy of the Criminal Complaints no.119/2011 and 02/2012 filed by the Appropriate Authority under PCPNDT Act before Hon'ble JMFC, Khamgaon, for violating various provisio...
Doshmani Vs. Ayoda Inok Anjore and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Mar-19-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr.A.S.Ganu, learned Counsel for the Appellant, Mr.M.B.Naidu, learned Counsel for Respondent no.5 and Mr.P.P.Kothari, learned Counsel for Respondent no.6. 2. This Second Appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dt.26.4.2007 passed by Ad-hoc District Judge-9, Nagpur in Regular Civil Appeal No.401 of 2004. The appeal was dismissed. The said appeal arose from the judgment and order dt.29.6.2004 passed in Special Civil Suit No.795 of 1998 by Joint Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Nagpur. It was a suit for specific performance of agreement to sell executed on 9.12.1994 by one of the defendants namely Smt. Ayoda Inok Anjore. The agreement to sell was exhibited as Exh. Nos.62 and 63. The original agreement to sell was dt.9.12.1997. It is the case of the plaintiff/appellant that earnest money was paid in the sum of Rs.20,500/- and later the sum of Rs.51,000/- was also paid towards the consideration for the agreement. Thus, total payment of Rs.71,500/- was made towards ag...
Rajendra Madhukar Kadam Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-19-2014
A.S. Gadkari, J. 1. The appellant, who stands convicted for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default of which to suffer RI for two months, by the 2nd Ad- Hoc Sessions Judge, Pune in Sessions Case No.467 of 2004, by its judgment and order dated 11 April 2007, has questioned the correctness of his conviction and sentence by the present appeal. The appellant, the original accused no.1 was tried along with two other accused persons i.e. original accused no.2 Smt. Pushpa Kadam and original accused no.3 Dilip Kshirsagar. The said accused nos.2 and 3 were acquitted by the learned Trial Court from the offences charged against them. 2. The facts in brief which emerged from the record and which are necessary for deciding the present appeal can be summerised thus: (i) PW-14- Police Inspector Shri Arvind Ramchandra Patil who was then attached to Samarth Police Station, Pune and was on dut...
Ravi Ramkrishna Gharat Vs. Shaman Wheels Pvt. Ltd. and Another
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-19-2014
Narendra Kawde, Member: 1. Heard on the point of admission. Ld. Advocate for the Complainant pleaded that high end Car, Mercedes Benz C Class Model was purchased by the Complainant on 22.02.2012 under a proforma invoice after making payment of Rs.35,05,387/- along with other taxes. This was a dream of the Complainant to have a status symbol Car for sparingly using by the Complainant. However, on 18.06.2013 i.e. almost after one and half year the Complainant noticed technical defect as the car drove out of road. On complaint it was given for repair to the street side mechanic on instructions of Opponent. The car was returned duly repaired on 26.06.2013. Thereafter, the Complainant, on 28.06.2013 was driving car to take his pregnant wife to hospital. However, the car was stuck-off and could not take forward as there was unknown manufacturing defect developed. Car was again given to the Opponent No.1 for repair. Since thereafter, the car was not taken into possession because of t...
Hansu Daleep Jatwani Vs. Gurukripa Properties Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-19-2014
P.B. Joshi, Presiding Judicial Member: 1. Complainant booked a flat with opponent in the project called œCleopatra? to be constructed on Plot Nos.42, 43, 44 and 45 in Sector 15-C, CBD, Belapur in Navi Mumbai. It was a duplex flat admeasuring 2200 sq.ft. bearing No.1103/1203A for a total consideration of Rs.14,30,000/-. Initially, complainant paid Rs.3,25,000/- and opponent acknowledged the receipt in the letter dated 30/08/1993. Then from time to time, amounts were paid by the complainant to the opponent. As per complainant she received a letter dated 21/10/1999 from opponent intimating that said project was being abandoned giving option one of which was worth considering of that shifting of booking to another ongoing project. By that time, complainant had paid Rs.7,25,000/-. Then, complainant accepted said proposal of shifting of booking. Opponent has issued three allotment letters on 11/12/2002, two for flats bearing Nos.502B and 503A which are adjoining each other admeasuring ...
M/S. Kulmaya Minerals and Transport Contractor and Another Vs. M/S. Me ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-18-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr. Bras De Sa, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Nandkishore Dubey, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.1. 2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By consent, heard forthwith. 3. The petitioners, by this Revision Application, have challenged the judgment and order dated 21/12/2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-II, South Goa at Margao ('Appellate Court') in Criminal Appeal No. 68/2012. By the said judgment dated 21/12/2013 passed in the said Criminal Appeal, the judgment and order dated 12/06/2012 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Vasco-da-Gama ('Trial Magistrate') in Criminal case No. 80/OA/NIA/2010/A was maintained. 4. The petitioners were the accused nos. 1 and 2 respectively, whereas respondent no.1 was the complainant in the said Criminal Case. Parties shall, hereinafter, be referred to as per their status in the said Criminal Case No. 80/OA/NIA/2010/A. 5. Facts g...
Dreymoor Fertilizers Overseas Pte. Ltd. Vs. M.V.theoforos-1, a Vessel ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-18-2014
1. On 30.08.2011 the plaintiff obtained an ex-parte order of arrest of the defendant-vessel when she was in the port and harbour of Mundra. On 9.9.2011 the defendant-vessel was ordered to be released when on behalf of the defendant security in the sum of US$ 335,000.00 was furnished. This amount was deposited with Incisive Law LLC, Singapore, as the escrow agent. 2. The reason why the plaintiff filed the suit and obtained the ex-parte order of arrest was that the plaintiff suffered a loss in the sum of Rs.1,31,12,080/- being the cost of 520.300 MT of urea which was allegedly short delivered by the defendant-vessel. It is the case of the plaintiff that pursuant to an agreement dated 25.7.2011, the plaintiff had sold to State Trading Corporation of India Ltd., New Delhi (STC) 50,000/- MT + 10% granular bulk urea at the price of AED 1859.13 per MT C and F FO Mundra. In order, for the plaintiff, to supply this cargo to STC, the plaintiff entered into a contract dated 27.7.2011 with one Ind...
Tanaji Dadasaheb Sargar Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-18-2014
Oral Judgment: (P.V. Hardas, J.) 1. The Appellant stands convicted for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 3 read with 25(1B) (a) of the Arms and Explosives Act, 1959 (Arms Act) and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of which to undergo further RI for 3 years, and RI for 3 years and to pay fine of Rs.500, in default of which to undergo further RI for 3 months, by III Ad-Hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur, by judgment dated 4 July 2005, in Sessions Case No.259 of 2004, questions the correctness of his conviction and sentence. 2. Facts, as are necessary for the decision of this appeal, may briefly be stated thus: (i) PW-11- Assistant P.I. Shrikant Arjun Padole who was attached to Vairag police station and was on duty on 5.8.2004, had received a message on telephone about two persons having fallen down from the motorcycle in front of the bungalow of Sarjerao Mohite and that these persons had sustai...
Dreymoor Fertilizers Overseas Pte. Ltd. Vs. M.V.theoforos-1, a Vessel ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-18-2014
1. On 30.08.2011 the plaintiff obtained an ex-parte order of arrest of the defendant-vessel when she was in the port and harbour of Mundra. On 9.9.2011 the defendant-vessel was ordered to be released when on behalf of the defendant security in the sum of US$ 335,000.00 was furnished. This amount was deposited with Incisive Law LLC, Singapore, as the escrow agent. 2. The reason why the plaintiff filed the suit and obtained the ex-parte order of arrest was that the plaintiff suffered a loss in the sum of Rs.1,31,12,080/- being the cost of 520.300 MT of urea which was allegedly short delivered by the defendant-vessel. It is the case of the plaintiff that pursuant to an agreement dated 25.7.2011, the plaintiff had sold to State Trading Corporation of India Ltd., New Delhi (STC) 50,000/- MT + 10% granular bulk urea at the price of AED 1859.13 per MT C and F FO Mundra. In order, for the plaintiff, to supply this cargo to STC, the plaintiff entered into a contract dated 27.7.2011 with one Ind...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »