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.
Sanjay Wamanrao Bodke and Another Vs. Padmini Nandkumar Nair and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule, with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, made returnable forthwith and heard. 2. The writ Jurisdiction of this court is invoked against the order dated 15th July, 2014 passed by the learned 5th Joint Civil Judge, senior Division, Nashik, by which order, the application Exhibit284 for striking out the defence of the Petitioners i.e. the Defendant Nos. 3 and 4 to the Suit in question, came to be allowed and the defences of the said Defendants came to be struck of. 3. It is not necessary to burden this order with unnecessary details. Suffice it to state that in the Suit in question being Special Civil Suit No. 420 of 2012 filed by the Respondent No. 1 herein/original Plaintiff for partition, in the said Suit an application Exhibit274 for interrogatories came to be filed by the original Plaintiff. The said application came to be partly allowed by the Trial Court by order dated 12th December, 2011. Insofar as the interrogatories are concerne...
Padma Vs. Adarsha Dnyan Prakash Shikshan Sanstha and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Sep-23-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. In terms of the order dated 14-8-2013, both these writ petitions are heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties by issuing Rule. As common issues arise for determination in both these petitions, they are being decided by this common judgment. Service on respondent No.2 in Writ Petition No.1623/2013 is dispensed in view of the order proposed to be passed. 2. The challenge in writ petition No.1623/2013 is to the judgment dated 1-3-2013 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Nagpur thereby dismissing the appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act 1977 (for short the Act). In writ petition No.2279/2013, the petitioner who claims to be the President of Adarsha Dnyan Prakash Sanstha has challenged the finding recorded against issue no.3 in aforesaid appeal by the School Tribunal, Nagpur. 3. The petitioner in Writ Petition No....
Meena Mohanlal Chauhan Vs. Nashik Municipal Corporation and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-2014
Oral Judgment: (G.S. Kulkarni, J.) 1. Rule returnable forthwith. Respondents waives service. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties and at their request taken up for Final Hearing. 2. By this Writ Petition essentially filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus against the respondents that the reservation of land bearing Survey Nos.299/3/1 (P) (in short "the land") admeasuring 6937.60 sq.meters situated at Ambad Khurd, District Nashik, is deemed to have lapsed and the petitioner is entitled to develop the said property as otherwise permissible in case of adjacent land under development plan. Briefly the facts are: 3. The petitioner is the owner of the said plot of land having purchased the same under a registered sale deed dated 28.6.2006 from one Shri.Gangadhar Gopal More. The petitioner's name was mutated in the revenue records on 6.10.2006. 4. The Development Plan for the Nashik city was sanctioned by the State Government ...
Mukaddarsingh Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Sep-23-2014
P.C. 1. Heard Shri Rai, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Deshpande, learned APP who has opposed this application. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and at this stage itself it can be established that the prosecution case against the applicant is highly suspicious and of doubtful nature. He points out from the FIR, spot panchanama and the recovery memos prepared in this case as to how the whole prosecution story is doubtful in nature. 3. Learned APP opposing the application submits that there may be some doubts in the prosecution case arising from mentioning of wrong dates in the recovery memos and mentioning of Crime Number in the spot panchanama, which appears to have been drawn up before the registration of the crime, but these doubts can be explained by the prosecution during the course of adducing of evidence and, therefore, the applicant should not be released on bail. 4. I would have accepted the cont...
Narayan Pandharinath Mahaskar Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-2014
Oral Judgment: (A.R. Joshi, J.) 1. Heard learned appointed advocate Mr Murtaza Najmi for the appellant-accused. Also heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. The present appeal is preferred by the appellant who is presently in jail since the day of his arrest, challenging the judgment and order dated 23rd May, 2007 in Sessions Case No.167 of 2006. The appellant-accused was convicted for the offence under section 302 of IPC and was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- in default to suffer imprisonment for two years. 3. The case of the prosecution, in nuts-hell, is as under: The incident of assaulting and killing the victim, wife of the present appellant, occurred on the night between 1 and 2nd September, 2005. About three to four days prior to this date, the appellant and his wife the victim came to reside in the hutment owned by one Jijabai Sonwane PW 3. They took the room on rent of Rs.300/- per month with deposit of Rs.200/-. Sinc...
Dr. Koustubh Kamlakar Mench Vs. Maharashtra Public Service Commission ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-2014
NareshH. Patil , J. 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. The petitioner challenges selection and appointment of respondent no.3 Dr. Shivprasad Tukaram Hiragade as Associate Professor. By an advertisement no.308/2012 dated 19th October, 2012 the Maharashtra State Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'MPSC' for short) issued an advertisement for filling in posts of Associate Professor, General Surgery. The educational qualification required for the said posts was M.S. (Surgery)/M.S. (General Surgery). Against the experience clause the condition mentioned in the advertisement reads as under: Experience of teaching as Assistant Professor/Lecturer in the subject concerned for five years in the recognised medical college/teaching institution. During the course of hearing it was submitted that around 77 persons applied. The MPSC shortlisted 38 persons and a select list of 11 deserving candidates was prepared. The respondent no.3...
Narayan Pandharinath Mahaskar Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-2014
Oral Judgment: (A.R. Joshi, J.) 1. Heard learned appointed advocate Mr Murtaza Najmi for the appellant-accused. Also heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. The present appeal is preferred by the appellant who is presently in jail since the day of his arrest, challenging the judgment and order dated 23rd May, 2007 in Sessions Case No.167 of 2006. The appellant-accused was convicted for the offence under section 302 of IPC and was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- in default to suffer imprisonment for two years. 3. The case of the prosecution, in nuts-hell, is as under: The incident of assaulting and killing the victim, wife of the present appellant, occurred on the night between 1 and 2nd September, 2005. About three to four days prior to this date, the appellant and his wife the victim came to reside in the hutment owned by one Jijabai Sonwane PW 3. They took the room on rent of Rs.300/- per month with deposit of Rs.200/-. Sinc...
Narendra Singh @ Dallu Sardar Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Sep-22-2014
C.V. Bhadang, J. 1. Heard. Admit. Taken up for final disposal with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. This appeal is filed by the original accused Narendra Singh @ Dallu Sardar challenging the order dated 10.1.2014 passed by the learned Special Court in Special Criminal Case No.5/2013. By the impugned order, the learned Special Judge has dismissed the application Exh.28 filed by the appellant/accused for discharge from the offence u/s 3 of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (MCOC Act for short). 3. The facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal may be stated thus: That, now deceased Suraj Yadav was a property dealer at Nagpur and had established a name in the business. According to the prosecution, the appellant is also dealing in property business and is running a Organised Crime Syndicate within the meaning of the act, along with his associates. The appellant was not happy with the influence of the deceased in the business and wanted to estab...
Vinayak Vs. State
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-22-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. This revision application has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 07.01.2013 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mapusa ("Appellate Court", for short) in Criminal Appeal No.153/2011. The said Criminal Appeal was, in turn, filed against the judgment and order dated 31.10.2011 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, "C" Court Bicholim ("J.M.F.C.", for short) in Criminal Case No.70/S/09/C. The applicant shall hereinafter be referred to as the accused and the respondent as prosecution. 2. Facts giving rise to the revision application, in short, are as under:- The accused was tried for offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("I.P.C." for short) in said Criminal Case No.70/S/09/C under the allegation that on 14.04.2009 at about 8.10 a.m., the accused drove minibus bearing No.GA-01-U-4699 in a rash and negligent manner and lost control over the same due to which the vehicle went towards the left...
Binddadin Ramasray Varma Vs. Ramsajivansingh B. Singh and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-2014
1. Admit. Learned counsel for the respondents waive service. By consent of the parties, the matter is placed on board for final hearing.2. This appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 29th April, 2009 rendered by the learned Commissioner for Workmens Compensation and Judge, Sixth Labour Court allowing the claim of the appellant partly.3. Being aggrieved by the rejection of the part claim of the appellant, the appellant has preferred this appeal. It is not in dispute that the insurance company has already paid the appellant in terms of the judgment and order dated 29th April, 2009. The insurance company has not challenged the said judgment dated 29th April, 2009. It was the case of the appellant that on 13th December, 2003 the appellant was injured while working as Labourer on truck of respondent no.1 and sustained compression fracture of vertebrae L1 and L2 and was treated in LTMG Sion Hospital. It was the case of the appellant that he has a residual permanent partial i...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »