Mumbai Court September 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.
Balak Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Sep-11-2014
Oral Judgment: (A.P. Bhangale, J.) 1. By this petition, the petitioner has prayed to declare that respondent no.2 erroneously discriminated amongst the project affected persons. It is further prayed to quash and set aside order dt.1.6.2001 and to direct respondent no.2 to absorb the petitioner in their plant at Butibori as per it's undertaking given in clause 3(p) of agreement. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to the format of agreement between the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Nagpur and license/lessee. As such, no concluded contract between the M.I.D.C. and the petitioner is brought to our notice. The petitioner relied upon the copies of correspondence between the Regional Manager, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and the Manager, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Butibori, Industrial area, Tq. Highna, District Nagpur and the Regional Officer, M.I.D.C., Nagpur and the petitioner whereby recommendation was made regarding employing the...
Harshalata Sudhakarrao Dhawale Vs. The Divisional Commissioner and Oth ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Sep-11-2014
A.P. Bhangale, J. 1. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the respective parties. 2. The petitioner has questioned sustainability of the impugned order, dated 15th March, 2013 passed by the Office of the Divisional Commissioner, Amravati Camp whereby the Assistant Commissioner (Backward Class Section, Amravati) communicated that the services of the petitioner cannot be protected in view of Section 10 (1) of the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 and also under the Government decision, dt.24.6.2004. The roster was directed to be prepared accordingly. 3. The facts are that the petitioner claimed that she belonged to Dhangar Caste. The Government of Maharashtra vide Government Resolutions dt. 13.10.1997, 17.1.1990 and 25.1.1990 changed the social status ...
Santosh Sashkant Dhonde Vs. Sarika Santosh Dhonde and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-11-2014
P.C. 1. Rule. 2. By consent, Rule made returnable forthwith. 3. By consent, heard finally. 4. The petitioner is the husband of the respondent no.1. The respondent no.1 has filed an application under section 12 of the Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act (for short 'the D.V.Act') which is pending before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Bhiwandi. The respondent no.1 had also applied for interim maintenance during the pendency of the application under section 12 of the D.V. Act, and such interim maintenance was granted by the learned Magistrate by an order dated 23rd August 2011. The petitioner filed an Appeal against the said order, but the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Thane was of the view that the Magistrate had not committed any error while passing the interim order, and consequently, dismissed the Appeal. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has approached this Court invoking its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 5. The learned counsel ...
Dahyaji Gobarji Vanzara Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-11-2014
Oral Order: 1. The Applicant is the Accused no.1 in Sessions Case No.177/13 which has been clubbed with Sessions Case Nos.178/13, 577/13 and 312/14, pending before the Court of Sessions at Mumbai. The case arises out of R.C.No.BS-1/S/2010 dated 1st February 2010 registered with CBI SCB, Mumbai. The applicant was working as the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Anti-Terrorism Squad, in the State of Gujarat, at the material time. 2. This Court had an occasion to deal with the bail applications filed by some other accused in the said case, and the facts of the case -which are by no means ordinary or usual - were noticed while dealing with such bail applications. The facts, for the sake of convenience may be mentioned almost in the same manner in which they were mentioned in the orders dealing with some of the bail applications filed by some other accused in this case. 3. The case of the Investigating Agency, in brief, is that the police officials of Anti Terrorists Squad (ATS), Gujarat,...
The State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary, Department of Public ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Sep-11-2014
A.P. Bhangale, J. 1. Heard submissions at the Bar. The Petitioner State of Maharashtra impugns judgment and order dated 17th November 1998 psssed by the Member (Judicial) of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal in Original Application No. 184 of 1996. The Tribunal has directed the petitioners to treat period between 2.9.1985 to 10.3.1993 as a period spent on duty by the respondent-employee. However, the Trbunal has held that the respondent would be entitled to half of her salary for the said period. She was also held to be entitled to increments, HRA and admissible allowances for the said period. 2. Facts are: By an order dated 02-08-1967 respondent was appointed as an Medical officer class III. She had joined duty from 09-08-1968. In 1976 she was confirmed on the said post. On 03-11-1978 she was promoted as Class II Medical officer. She joined but was transferred from Balapur to Akola by order dated 23-06-1983. On 21-08-1985, she was again transferred from Akola to Balapur, even be...
Kawadu Vs. Deputy Conservator of Forest, Pandharkawada Forest Division
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Sep-11-2014
1. Heard submissions at the Bar. 2. Petitioner (Original Complainant) has prayed to quash and set aside the Order, dt.17.11.2003 passed by the Industrial Court, Yavatmal in Revision U.L.P. No.114 of 1999, which was allowed setting aside the Judgment and Order, dt.26.4.1995 passed in Complaint U.L.P. No.341 of 1994 by the Labour Court at Yavatmal. The petitioner has prayed for his reinstatement and continuity of service with full back wages. According to the petitioner/Complainant, he had filed the Complaint under Section 28, Item No.la, b and d of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 against the respondent for reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages. The Complainant was working with the respondent with effect from 9.4.1984 at Umari Timber Depot. He was taking measurement of woods, giving numbers and maintaining the record. He was earning Rs.20.90 per day and was given one day break per 29 day...
Zishan Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-2014
P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant. Learned APP waives service and seeks time to take instructions. Time as prayed for is granted. Stand over to 29/9/2014. 2. This is an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No.165 of 2014 registered at Navghar Police Station, for offence punishable under Section 363, 365 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The case of the prosecution is that on 30th May, 2014 one Sajid Hazi Abdulla had lodged a report at the police station that he is the father of Amrin who is about 18 years old. On 22nd May, 2014 his daughter was missing. He had searched for the daughter. He suspected that since he had opposed to the intimate relations between the present applicant and his daughter Amrin, the present applicant and his parents have abducted his daughter. The offence was registered under Section 363 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. The learned Coun...
Western Coalfields Ltd., Through its General Manager Vs. G.N. Shah, Ch ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Sep-10-2014
1. Heard Shri A.S. Mehadia, the learned Advocate for the petitioner-Management and Shri Shaikh Ayyub, the learned Advocate for the respondent. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 3. The petitioner-Management has challenged the order passed by the Central Government, Industrial cum Labour Court, Nagpur holding that the action of the petitioner-Management in not accepting the demand of compassionate appointment of Shri Ravi Kumar s/o deceased workman Shri Puranlal is unjustified and illegal and directing the petitioner-Management to give employment to Shri Ravi Kumar commensurate to his skill and qualifications within one month from the date of award. 4. Shri Puranlal, who was in the employment of the petitioner-Management, expired on 26th November, 1997 while in service. On 12th June, 1998 Smt. Draupadabai widow of Shri Puranlal submitted an application requesting the petitioner to provide employment to her son Ravi Kumar on compassionate grounds. On 26th April, 2001 the petitioner...
Girish Jaggal and Another Vs. Mallikarjun Shipping Pvt Ltd.
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-10-2014
1. Heard Mr. Vales, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in both the petitions and Mr. Ramani, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent in both the petitions. 2. This common Judgment shall dispose of both the above petitions as the parties, facts and law involved in both are the same though the cheques are different. 3. By these writ petitions, the petitioners have taken exception to the order dated 07/01/2013 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Mapusa (trial Judge), separately, in Criminal Case No. 119/OA/NI/12/B and Criminal Case No. 126/OA/NIA/2012/C, thereby directing issuance of process against the petitioners under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (the Act, for short) and the order dated 18/10/2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Margao (Appellate Judge, for short), separately, in Criminal Revision Application No. 85/2013 and in Criminal Revision Application No. 74/2013. The petitioners have prayed f...
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Pushpa @ Bebi Bholan ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Sep-10-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. This appeal preferred by the Insurance Company challenges the Award dated 12.07.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Wardha, in M.A.C.P. No.48 of 2008, only to the extent it holds the Insurance Company liable to pay the compensation and the interest along with the owner and Driver of the vehicle. It was a specific stand taken by the Insurance Company that the accident in question occurred on 24.01.2008 whereas the offending vehicle i.e. Auto rickshaw bearing registration No.MH-32/TC-47 was insured for the first time on 28.01.2008, which was valid up to 28.01.2009 and as such the vehicle in question was not insured on the date of accident. 2. The Tribunal has recorded a specific finding that the cover note at Exh. 68 was issued on 23.01.2008 from the book at Exh. 83, which was issued subsequently on 28.03.2008 and hence it cannot be relied upon. It is the finding recorded that the cover note is totally manipulated and a policy at Exh. 81 issued on 28.01.2...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »