Mumbai Court July 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.
Chandrabai w/o Laxman Samindrache (Died) through LRs. Vs. Venkatrao Tu ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-10-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. This second appeal challenges the judgment and decree dated 29th December, 1989 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded in Regular Civil Appeal No.3358 of 1983. By this judgment, the learned District Judge had set aside the decree for partition passed by the trial Court. 2. Fact leading to the present litigation are as under: The original plaintiff was Chandrabai widow of Laxman. She came to Court with following complaint: "Chandrabai asserted that her husband Laxman died in 1954 leaving behind the suit property. The suit property is a piece of land admeasuring 2 acres 34 Gunthas at village Ravvankkola, Taluka Mukhed, District Nanded. She said that on the death of her husband which occurred in 1954, she become entitled to half share in the suit land and said that remaining half share would go to her only son Sangram. The partition did not take place between Sangram and Chandrabai. Her son Sangram continued management of the land. In the course of time,...
Novartis India Limited and Others Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-2014
Oral Judgment: (Anoop V. Mohta, J.) 1. Heard finally by consent of parties. 2. The Petitioners, in view of Supreme judgment in Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Company Limited vs. State of Maharashtra and ors, (2009) 5 SCC 24) dated 6.2.2009 have filed the present Petition on 18 February 2011 and prayed as under : (a) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directing the 1st and 2nd Respondents, their servants, agents and officers to forthwith issue to the Petitioners additional DRCs under Appendix VII ) 6) to the extent of 19,463.40 sq.mts for the balance 75% of the area of the amenity / Development Plan Road constructed and taken over by the 1st Respondents as per their application dated 29th June 2009 (Ex. G hereto). 3. There is no serious dispute with regard to the following facts : Petitioner No. 1 (Novartis India Ltd) was the ow...
Sopanrao Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-10-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. The appellant has been convicted by the learned Special Judge under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Washim for the offences punishable under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. The appellant was resident of Dhawanda within the jurisdiction of Manora Police Station, District Washim. The victim lady Radhabai was resident of village Sawali. On the date of incident she had gone to Digras. She had returned from Digras by a Bus and got down at the main road on the junction from where a road leads to her village Sawali. The junction from where the road leads to village Sawali is known as 'Sawali Fata' and the same will be referred to as 'Sawali Fata' hereinafter. After getting down at Sawali Fata, the complainant was proceeding to her village. She was accompanied by P.W.1-Namdeo Jadhav and P.W.2-Dattaram Rathod. I...
Mustafa Fattu Tadvi Vs. The State of Maharashtra Through Police Statio ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-10-2014
1. These two Cri.Revn.Appln. can be disposed of by the present common judgment. Though two different Criminal Appeals were preferred before the lower appellate court bearing Cri.Appeal Nos. 31/1997 and 32/1997, since the appellant and the complainant were common and the offence was in respect of the transaction of the same Society about the misappropriation, the learned lower appellate court by its common judgment dated 9th June, 2000 was pleased to dismiss both the criminal Appeals, thereby, confirming the Judgments and Orders passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, F.C., Raver, Dist. Jalgaon passed in Regular Criminal Case Nos. 132/1987 and 133/1987 convicting the applicant for the offence punishable U/Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. In both the Regular Criminal Cases, the learned Magistrate by his separate Judgments dated 9th June, 2000 convicted the present applicant for the offence punishable U/Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and directed him to suffer Ri...
Dattatraya Sukdeo Chitte Vs. State of Maharashtra Through the Under Se ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-2014
NareshPatil, J. 1. This petition was admitted vide order dated 6th October 2005. Interim relief in terms of prayer clause (c) is operating since then. 2. The petitioner seeks directions to quash and set aside a communication dated 24th August 2005 issued by respondent No.1 to respondent No.2 and a declaration that the said communication dated 24th August 2005 was illegal. 3. The petitioner contends that his father was in service of respondent No.3-Zilla Parishad and was discharging duties as Head Master of Prathamik Vidya Mandir at Vinchoor. Father of the petitioner expired on 17th April 2003. The petitioner made an application to the Executive Officer of the Zilla Parisahd requesting for an appointment on compassionate ground. Considering the stringent financial conditions faced by the petitioner and considering his qualifications, a specific request was made by the petitioner to appoint him as Extension Officer in the service of the Zilla Parishad. By communication dated 18th October...
The Commissioner of Income Vs. M/s. Diageo India Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-2014
B.P. Colabawalla J. 1. This Appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act 1961 filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-7, Mumbai takes exception to the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the ITAT) on 5th September 2011. By the impugned order, the ITAT has allowed in favour of the assessee the deductions of the amounts paid by it to its employees on account of severance pay. The ITAT took the view that though the Assessee was not entitled to claim the said deduction under section 37(1), it could be amortized under the provisions of section 35DDA of the Act. Being aggrieved by this finding of the ITAT, the present Appeal has been filed. 2. Mr Tejveer Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant, submitted that the ITAT erred in applying the provisions of section 35DDA of the Act inasmuch as, in the facts of the present case, the Assessee had transferred its domestic whisky business (i.e. its manufacturing facility at...
Ashok Vs. Head Master, Zilla Parishad High School and Another
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-09-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Being aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree dated 24th June, 2013 passed by learned District Judge-1, Bhandara, in Regular Civil Appeal No.14 of 2010 whereby the Judgment and Decree dated 08th April, 2009 passed by learned Civil Judge [Junior Division], Lakhni, in Regular Civil Suit No.61 of 2009 has been confirmed, the present Second Appeal has been filed by the appellant who is an employee/Deputy Engineer working with Nashik Municipal Corporation, Nashik. 2. The matter came up before me since an application for early hearing, namely Civil Application (CAS) No.374 of 2014 has been moved by the appellant. Since the matter relates to the correction of Date of Birth of the employee in service who is to retire on 31st July, 2014, on the basis of the alleged incorrect date of birth, I have decided to take up the Second Appeal for final disposal and accordingly the counsel for parties were heard. 3. The following Substantial Questions of Law arise in the present Second Appe...
K and M Sheltors Private Ltd. Vs. Poonam V. Punjabi and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-2014
S.C. Gupte, J. P.C. : 1. The Notice of Motion is taken out by the Plaintiff in a suit for specific performance of a development agreement. The development agreement is entered into by a CoOperative Housing Society Defendant No.4 with the Plaintiff, who is a developer. The Notice of Motion seeks appointment of Court Receiver with power to take over physical possession of two flats in the building owned by Defendant No.4 Cooperative Society. 2. The short facts of the case, as alleged by the Plaintiff, may be stated thus: (i) Defendant No.4, which is a Cooperative Housing Society of flat owners, owns a plot being Plot No. 94B, T.P.S. IV, Linking Road, Santacruz (West), Mumbai 400 054. A building consisting of 11 flats exists on the suit plot. There are 10 members of Defendant No.4, who owns these 11 flats. Defendant No.1 and Defendant Nos.2 and 3, who are members of Defendant No.4 Society, respectively, own Flat Nos.9 and 10 in the suit building (which are referred to as suit flat/s). (...
Himanshu Singh Rajawat Vs. CBI, Mumbai and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-2014
Oral Order: 1. These two applications can be conveniently disposed of by this common order, as the applicants in both these applications are the accused in one and the same case, that is case arising out of R.C. No.BS1/S/2010/0004 dated 1/2/2010 registered with CBI SCB, Mumbai. Both of them were working as Sub-Inspectors of Police in District Udaipur, Rajasthan, at the material time. 2. The facts of the case were noticed while dealing with the Bail Applications previously filed by some other accused in the said case. As a matter of fact, the applicant Shyam Singh Charan (BA No.715/14) had also previously filed an application for bail before this Court which was rejected by me by an order dated 10th July 2013 (BA No.1984/12). The facts of the case were mentioned in the said order. However, for the sake of convenience, they may be reproduced again here. 3. The case of the Investigating Agency, in brief, is that the police officials of Anti Terrorists Squad (ATS), Gujarat, and Special Tas...
Dr. D.Y. Patil Pratishthan's Padmashree Dr. D.Y. Patil Polytechnic, Th ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-2014
Oral Judgment: (Anoop V. Mohta, J.) 1. Rule, returnable forthwith. 2. In view of the urgency so expressed, heard learned Counsel for both the parties finally. 3. The Petitioner, a Trust running an education Institution has filed the present Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for appropriate writ, direction and order and prayed as under: a) (i) the Respondent No.2 in it's Higher and Technical Education Department to forthwith issue appropriate Government Resolution/Notification recording the approval granted by AICTE to the Petitioner Institution for A.Y. 2014-15; (ii) the Respondent No.1 to forthwith include the Petitioner in Centralised Admission Procedure (CAP) for First Year Engineering Courses (Diploma) as approved by AICTE for A.Y. 2014-2015 and to issue Institute Code and further display the name of petitioner on its web portal along with Institute Information, course wise sanctioned intake and choice codes. 4. Technical education and related aspects...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »