Mumbai Court April 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.
The Principal, R.R.Educational Trust's college of Education and Resear ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-2014
G.S. Kulkarni, J. 1. Rule. Returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties taken up for final hearing. 2. The petitioner an educational institution which is conducting a Bachelors in Eduction course (for short œB.Ed.?) has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution interalia praying for writ of mandamus against the Respondent “ University of Mumbai (for short University) to quash and set aside the decision of the University to impose a fine/penalty on the Petitioner institution of Rs. 5,40,000/- and the coercive steps being taken against the Petitioner for recovery of the same. This decision of the University is contained in the communication dated 3.12.2007, 5.12.2012 and 7.2.2013 of the University as challenged in prayer clause (a) of the writ petition. This penalty/ fine is imposed by the University on the petitioner as a condition for issuing provisional eligibility certificates in favour of 54 students admitted by the petitioner to the B.Ed. Cours...
Alpha Oil International Vs. M.T. Chem Lily
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. This Notice of Motion is taken out on behalf of the defendant praying for (a) an order and direction to the plaintiff to deposit sum of Rs.24 lakhs as security for costs incurred and likely to be incurred by the defendant or such other amount as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper and (b) dismiss the suit in the event the plaintiff fails to furnish security should the Court decide to allow the prayer for security for costs. 2. Mr.Pratap Senior Counsel for the defendant submitted that this Notice of Motion should be heard and disposed before the matter proceeds further. 3. Pursuant to an order dated 19.3.2008 the applicant as the owner of the defendant-vessel furnished security in the sum of USD 460,000 + interest at 6% p.a. as security for release of the defendant vessel. This was despite the fact that the original order of arrest required the defendant to furnish security in the sum of USD 12,24,976.12 which was shown to be incorrect at the time of applying for r...
The Medical Superintendent, Rural Hospital and Others Vs. Manisha Nara ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Apr-08-2014
Oral Judgment : 1. Rule, made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties. 2. The challenge in all these petitions is to the common judgment and order dated 18.4.2012 passed by the Industrial Court in Complaints (ULP) Nos.52, 53, 66 to 72, 77, 78, and 83 to 90 of 2010. The Industrial Court has allowed the complaints and granted the declaration that the petitioner-employer is engaged in an unfair labour practice falling under Item 5 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (œMRTU and PULP Act?). The consequential declaration is also granted that and connected matters.odt the complainants are entitled to be regularized on their posts of Staff Nurses from the date on which they were initially appointed. However, the claim of the complainants under Items 6 and 9 of Schedule IV of the MRTU and PULP Act has been rejected. 3. All the complainants are holding the ...
Kamalbai Vs. the State of Maharashtra Through Ministry for Food, Civil ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Apr-08-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective sides at length. Rule was issued on 26-08-2011. 2. Respondent No. 4 was operating a fair price shop No. 79 in Village Vasai, Tq. Sillod. He was charged with illegally selling food items and kerosene. Criminal trial was initiated against him after suspending his licence. 3. The petitioner submits that prior to 2004 or before proclamation of this shop, it was run by respondent No. 4. In the year 2001, this shop was suspended by the Sub Divisional Officer Sillod, because the respondent No. 4 was found involved in black marketing of kerosene and therefore a crime under sections 3 and 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955, came to be registered against respondent No. 5 vide crime No. 3/2001, in Rural Police Station of Sillod. The Sub Divisional Officer, suspended his authorization of fair price shop on 21-06-2001. 4. The petitioner submits that because there was no other fair price shop in the village and it was in the need of ...
Shalik Maruti Kowe (In Jail) Vs. State of Maharashtra, Through Its Sec ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Apr-08-2014
1. The petitioner though has initially approached this Court being aggrieved by the order dated 19.6.2012 passed by the respondent no.3 and the order dated 22.6.2012 passed by the learned In-charge Principal District and Sessions Judge, Amravati, the petitioner had by way of amendment challenged the vires of Rule 22(i) of the Maharashtra Prisons (Remission System) Rules, 1962 being ultra vires of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 2. The undisputed facts giving rise to the present petition are as under:- On 24.8.1996 the petitioner came to be arrested in connection with a murder case. The petitioner stood convicted for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code on 23.6.1997 and was put in Amravati Central Prison. Taking into consideration the good conduct of the petitioner, the petitioner came to be transferred to Morshi Open Prison on 14.5.2008. The petitioner had earned remission while he was at Central Prison, Amravati, so also at Open Prison, Morshi. How...
State ((Through Special Public Prosecutor) Vs. Srikar Naik Kurade and ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Apr-08-2014
F.M. Reis, J. 1. The above Appeal challenges the Judgment dated 10.07.2003 passed in Sessions Case no.18/2000, whereby, Respondent nos. 1, 3 and 4 were given the benefit of doubt and, consequently, acquitted from charges under Section 120-B, 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the Arms Act and a non-bailable warrant was issued against the Respondent no. 2. 2. It was the case of the Appellants/Prosecution that on 23.11.1999 at 21.30 hours, Shri Prakash Ramchandra Pujari resident of Davorlim, lodged a complaint that on 23.11.1999 at about 20.15 hours, at Khareaband, Margao, his brother in law Guru Pujari, whilst standing near his car, two unknown persons came on a Yamaha motorcycle and fired shots by pistol and fled with the said Yamaha motorcycle; that his said brother in law Gurudas Pujari, collapsed sustaining bleeding injuries and was shifted to the Hospicio Hospital, Margao, where he was declared dead before admission. Accordingly, an offence was registered under Section ...
Ushdev International Ltd. Vs. Sims Copper Sdn.Bhd. and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-2014
Oral Order:(Chief Justice) 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 3 March 2014 of the learned Trial Judge dismissing the notice of motion taken out by the appellant-plaintiff to restrain/injunct the respondent-defendant No.5 Bank (issuing Bank) from making any payment to respondent-defendant No.2-Bank (negotiating Bank) under the Letter of Credit dated 28 October 2011. 2. The above Notice of Motion was taken out by the appellant-plaintiff in a suit for permanent injunction to:- (i) restrain respondent-defendant Nos.1 and 2-bank from acting in-furtherance of Letter of Credit on 28 October 2011 for US$1.25 million; and (ii) to declare the Bill of Lading dated 3 November 2011 null and void, being fraudulent. 3. The plaintiff entered into a contract for purchase of goods with defendant No.1. The goods were to be shipped by defendant No.1. A Bill of Lading is stated to have been issued. At the instance of the plaintiff, a Letter of Credit was issued by defendant No.5-Bank to the...
Jaibhawani Bachat Gat Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Through Its Princi ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Apr-08-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties, heard finally. 2. By order dated 13/02/2013, notices were issued to the respondents. Service of notice on respondent Nos.1 to 5 is complete. Learned A.G.P. appears on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Respondent No.5 appears to be consistently absent though served as can be seen from the orders of this Court. 3. By order dated 03/03/2014, this Court had recorded the submissions of the petitioner and yet adjourned the matter to enable respondent No.5, the contesting respondent, to assist this Court. Respondent No.5 was put to notice that if he choose to remain absent, the petition would be heard and decided without his assistance. It appears that even today, respondent No.5, though served, is absent. 4. Contention of the petitioner is that respondent No.1 has renewed the kerosene license of respondent No.5 after 22 years. Respondent No.5 is the legal heir of the person, who had earlier held the license ab...
Maharashtra State Co-operative Cotton Growers' Marketing Federation Li ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Apr-08-2014
The only question that arises for determination in this writ petition is whether on the withdrawal of the prohibitory order dated 04.03.2013 prohibiting the petitioner-Maharashtra State Cooperative Cotton Growers' Federation Limited from withdrawing amount from its account in Bank of India, by the order dated 12.03.2013, the respondent-Employees' State Insurance Corporation was liable to redeposit the amount of Rs.27,25,171/- in the account of the petitioner-Federation on the principle of restitution. The respondent-Corporation had issued recovery certificates against the petitioner under the provisions of the Employees State Insurance Act, as according to the respondent-Corporation, the petitioner-Federation was covered under the provisions of the Act. Against the recovery certificates for the period from 1976 to 1988, the petitioner-Federation filed applications before the Employees' Insurance Court seeking a declaration that the petitioner-Federation is not covered by the provisions...
Sanjay Santan @ Santram SaThe Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-2014
A.S. Gadkari, J. 1. The Appellant/original accused has questioned the correctness of the judgment and order dated 29 December 2004 passed by IInd Ad Hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Pandharpur in Sessions Case No.118 of 2004 thereby convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and also to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of the fine, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. The Appellant has further been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and also to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of which to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. The Learned Trial Court has ordered that the substantive sentences shall run concurrently. The accused was charged of committing the murder of his wife i.e. deceased Swati on 28 April 2004 at about 1.30 to 2.00 a.m. in the wee hours. 2. The b...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »