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.
M/s. Dilip Kumar V. Lakhi Vs. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-31-2014
1. The petitioner is an importer and exporter of diamonds and an insurer of the respondent in respect of certain consignment of diamonds. The petitioner has been issued an insurance policy by the respondent insuring the diamonds inter alia against the theft / robbery / loss for Rs.1.10 Crores. The policy sets out certain conditions precedent to the liability of the respondent therein.2. The petitioner made a claim under the policy of Rs.1.16 Crores upon the theft / robbery / loss of diamonds in a particular consignment. The respondent carried out a certain survey and considered certain documents. The respondent offered Rs.52 lakhs to the petitioner if it was accepted in full and final settlement along with a deed of indemnity to be signed by the petitioner. Rs. 64 lakhs was not accepted.3. The insurance policy contained an arbitration clause. The petitioner invoked arbitration. The petitioner lodged its claim. The arbitral tribunal consisting of three Arbitrators considered the case of...
FGP Limited Vs. Saleh Hooseini Doctor and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-31-2014
1. The above Suit is filed on 10th October, 1991, by the Plaintiff - FGP Limited against the Original Defendant inter alia for an order and decree against the Defendant to specifically perform the Agreement for Sale executed on or about July, 1981 (Exhibit-A to the Plaint) and in the alternative for damages as claimed. The Original Defendant died on 31st January, 1999. On 26th February, 2001, the husband of the Original Defendant being her heir was brought on record. The husband of the Original Defendant died on 4th July, 2001. Thereafter his heirs i.e. the present Defendants are brought on record. The Suit is therefore pending before this Court since the last 23 years. 2. On 2nd July 2004, the Plaintiff herein filed a Chamber Summons being Chamber Summons No.913 of 2004 seeking the amendment of the Plaint in terms of the Schedule annexed thereto. The said Chamber Summons was rejected by the Learned Single Judge and the Appeal preferred therefrom was also dismissed by the Division Benc...
Dhiraj Jagdish Khairmode and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-31-2014
P.C. 1. This is an application under section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code as the applicants are prosecuted under section 306, 330, 342 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The facts of this case are that the applicants/accused are two police constables. They had picked up the deceased and took him to the police station at Nijampura police Station, Bhiwandi, Thane on 20.6.2014. They made allegations that the deceased had committed theft of 2 kg. gold. They asked him to confess the same. He was taken at around 11 O'clock. He did not admit to the offence. Therefore, they put him on the chair and handcuffed him. They also assaulted him with kicks and fist blows on his chest and stomach. In the evening they allowed him to go alongwith his brother to his house and asked him to come next day at 11am for enquiry. The deceased, on his return, informed the first informant Chander Thakare, the brother of the deceased that the police have told him that he should confess, otherwise, they would se...
Summit Partners L.P. Vs. Bank of New York Mellon, London Branch and Ot ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-31-2014
MohitS. Shah, CJ. 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 16 April 2014 of the learned Trial Judge of this Court dismissing Chamber Summons No.1945 of 2011 taken out by the Appellant (Defendant no.3) for revocation of the leave granted to Respondent no.1 (Plaintiff) under Clause-XII of the Letters Patent or in the alternative for deletion of Defendant no.3 from the array of the parties to the suit. 2. On 15 September 2006, the Respondent no.2 herein (Defendant no.1)-Zenith Infotech Limited offered US $ 33 million 3% convertible bonds due for repayment or redemption on expiry of five years. On 14 August 2007, the Defendant no.1 further offered US $ 50 million 3% convertible bonds for repayment or redemption on expiry of five years. The bonds were issued at 100% of the principal amount. The Plaintiff is the trustee holding the aforesaid bonds in trust for the bond holders, who responded to the above offer. The Defendant no.1 failed to pay the amounts due under 2011 and 2012 bo...
Dhananjay Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-31-2014
Oral Order: 1. Heard both sides. 2. In both the present applications, the applicants, who were arrested in Crime No.9/2014, registered with Patoda Police Station, District Beed, for the offences punishable under section 302, 201 read with section 34 of the I.P. Code and under section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, out of which now the Sessions Case No.71/2014 is pending on the file of Sessions Judge, Beed, are seeking their release on bail. 3. The submissions of both sides and the record would show that on 15th January, 2014, deceased Shrimant Subhash Pawar has died in the Primary Health Centre at Patoda. The statements of the Medical Officer as well as compounder would show that some unknown persons had brought him there with information that they themselves had beaten him as he had attempted to commit the theft in the Ginning and Pressing Mill of the father of the present applicant Vijaysing @ Bala Ramkrushna Bangar i.e. the appli...
Prakash Gopalrao Pohare and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-31-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Appellant Nos.1 to 6 were accused in Sessions Trial No.33/1997 decided by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Akola on 24-8-1998. All the appellants have been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147 and 332 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Appellant Nos.1, 2, 6, 7, 8 and 9 have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of fifteen days each for the offences punishable under Sections 143 and 147 of the Indian Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 332 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Appellant Nos.3, 4, and 5 were released on execution of bail bonds under the Probation of Offenders Act. 2. I have heard learned Senior Counsel Shri Anil Mardikar for the appellants and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mrs. Rashi Deshpande for the respondent/State. I have gone through the evidence of witnesses, particularly the evidence of P.W.4-Sukhdeo Sonar, who was...
Vilas Nagesh Jadhav Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-30-2014
Oral Judgment: (P.V. Hardas, J.) 1. The appellant/ Original Accused No.1 - Vilas, who stands convicted for an offence punishable under Sections 302, 307 and 324 of the IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/-, in default of which to undergo RI for one year, RI for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of which to undergo RI for six months and RI for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- in default of which to undergo RI for two months, with a direction that the appellant would be entitled for set off, by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Satara, by judgment dated 13/10/1992, in Sessions Case No.126 of 1989, by this appeal questions the correctness of his conviction and sentence. During the pendency of this appeal, Original Accused No.2 - Nagesh expired and consequently the appeal filed by him was dismissed as abated. 2. Facts in brief as are necessary for the decision of this appeal may be stated thus:- PW 12 - Police Head Constab...
Karishma Qureshi Vs. Faisal Qureshi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-30-2014
1. By this petition preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has impugned the order dated 21st May, 2013 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court No.7, Bandra, Mumbai, below Exhibit No.53 in Petition No.A-964/2011. 2. The short question that arises for consideration is: whether on the basis of the admission made by the respondent, the petitioner is entitled to a decree of divorce under Order 12 Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure ('CPC'). 3. Brief facts as are necessary to decide the present petition are as follows : The petitioner and the respondent got married on 19th December, 2002 under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 and the said marriage came to be registered with the Registrar of Marriage. On 12th August, 2005, the parties were blessed with a daughter. Thereafter, differences arose between the parties, pursuant to which, the petitioner filed a petition on 21st April, 2011 in the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai, interalia, seeking divorce on the g...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Bhaskar and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-30-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. This is an appeal against acquittal filed by the State against the judgment and order passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Pusad on 18th May, 2012 in Criminal Appeal No.26 of 2008 acquitting the respondents of the offence punishable under Section 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The said appeal arose out of the judgment and order passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pusad in Regular Criminal Case No.100 of 1998. 2. Respondent Nos.1 to 9 were convicted by the learned trial Court for the offence punishable under Section 323 read with Section 149 and 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. They had been sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment of six months for the former offence and one month for the later offence. The respondent challenged the judgment and order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class in appeal before the Sessions Court. The Sessions Court by its impugned judgment and order allowed the appeal partly and convicted resp...
Cenzer Industries Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-30-2014
1. Leave to amend the prayer clause in the petition to challenge the order dated 11 October 2012. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. Re-verification is dispensed with. 2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has challenged the order dated 11 October 2013 passed by the ITAT dismissing the Misc. Application for rectification under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act,1961 ("the Act"). By the Misc. Application the petitioner sought to rectify/recall the order dated 5 June 2009 passed by the ITAT in respect of the petitioner's appeal for A.Y. 1998-99 under the Act. 3. The ITAT by the impugned order had rejected the application for rectification on the basis that the ground for rectification viz. The entire proceedings emanating from a reopening where u/s.148 of the Act is without jurisdiction was a ground specifically given up during the hearing of the appeal leading to order dated 5 June 2009. The ITAT in the impugned order records the fact th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »