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.
The Divisional Controller, Maharashtra State Road, Transport Corporati ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Sep-16-2014
Oral Judgment:1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by the consent of the parties.2. The petitioner-M.S.R.T.C. contends that the respondent was appointed as a daily wager on 27-03-1991. He was entered on the P.F. role on 15-06-1991. He was a bus driver. He was taken on temporary time scale with effect from 14-02-1992.3. The respondent was driving a bus which was involved in an accident on 18-11-1992. The said accident resulted in the death of three persons and seriously injured one person. As a consequence the respondent was dismissed on 16-03-993 after conducting a domestic enquiry under the Discipline and Appeal Rules of the petitioner.4. The respondent challenged his dismissal by filing complaint (ULP) No. 198 of 1993 before the Labour Court at Jalgaon. By its judgment and order dated 13-01-2000, the complaint was dismissed. The enquiry was held to be fair and proper and the findings of the Enquiry Officer were held to be sustainable.5. The respondent filed revis...
Bank of Maharashtra Vs. Bhuribai Bhudarmal Shah and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2014
1. By administrative order dated 14.3.2013, the Honourable Chief Justice was pleased to club this Writ Petition along with Writ Petition No.1363 of 2012 (O.S.). By subsequent order dated 4.7.2014, both these petitions were placed before me. 2. Heard Mr. A.A.Kumbhakoni, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Deepak Lulia, learned counsel for respondents no.1 to 4 and Mr. Milind Jadhav, learned counsel for the interveners at length. Rule. Mr. Lulia waives service on behalf of the respondents. At the request and by consent of the parties, Rule is made returnable forthwith and the Petition is taken up finally. 3. By this Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the original defendant has challenged the Judgment and order dated 14.1.2013 passed by the learned Judge presiding over Court Room No.19, of the Court of Small Causes at Bombay, below Exhibit No.13 in T.E. and R. No.82/106 of 2011. By that order, the learned trial Judge allowed the Application filed by the re...
Neon Laboratories Ltd. Vs. Themis Medicare Ltd. and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2014
1. This is an action in trademark infringement combined with a cause of action in passing off. The Plaintiff manufactures, markets and sells various pharmaceutical goods. The 1st Defendant markets the pharmaceutical products manufactured by the 2nd Defendant. 2. The Plaintiff claims that its registered trade marks, LOX 2% ADRENALINE, LOX 4%, LOX 5%, LOX HEAVY 5%, LOX VISCOUS, LOXALPRIN, LOXALPRY, LOXIMLA, PLOX and RILOX (the LOX Family), have been infringed by the Defendants use of deceptively similar trade marks XYLOX 2%, XYLOX HEAVY, XYLOX GEL, XYLOX ADRENALINE, XYLOX 2% Jelly (the XYLOX Family), and that the Defendants are attempting to pass off their goods as those of the Plaintiff. The present application is for interim reliefs, including an injunction, and for the appointment of a Court Receiver. 3.I have heard Dr. Tulzapurkar, learned Senior Counsel for the Plaintiff, and Mr. Parikh, learned Counsel for the 1st Defendant, at some length. With their assistance, I have gone throug...
Jaideep and Others Vs. Uday
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. With the consent of the Learned Counsel for the parties made returnable forthwith and heard. 2. The Writ Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked against the order dated 9-1-2014 passed by the Learned 4th Additional Judge of Small Causes Court, Pune, by which order, the application Exhibit 23 filed by the Petitioners herein for appointment of the Petitioner No.2 i.e. the Defendant No.2 to the Suit as guardian of the Petitioner No.3 i.e. the Defendant No.3 came to be rejected. 3. It is not necessary to burden this order with unnecessary details. Suffice it to say that Suit in question being Special Civil Suit No.376 of 2013 has been filed by the Respondent herein for declaration that he is the co-owner to the extent of 1/4th share in the flat in question. The second relief is that the This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order Defendants be restrained by way of permanent injunction from creating any third party right in the suit flat whereby sell,...
Amit Kumar Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Sep-16-2014
Oral Judgment: (B.R. Gavai, J.) 1. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard the learned counsel for the parties finally by consent. 2. The applicant has approached this Court for quashing the FIR bearing No. 207 of 2014 for the offence punishable under Sections 328, 294, 507, 506(B) and 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The applicant and Respondent No. 2 are both students of different Engineering Colleges in the city of Nagpur. Both, the applicant as also Respondent No. 2 are residents of different States. The applicant is the resident of Bihar whereas Respondent No. 2 is the resident of Madhya Pradesh. 4. The FIR came to be lodged by Respondent No. 2 stating therein that when she was returning in a train from her native place, the applicant started talks with her and tried to develop intimacy with her and took her mobile number. It is further stated that thereafter they started meeting each other. It is further stated that one night in November 2013, she had gone to the residence of...
Ravindra Murlidhar Kalekar Hindu Adult Vs. Mumbai Municipal Corporatio ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2014
F.M. Reis, J. 1. The above Writ Petition inter alia seeks for the following reliefs : i) By a suitable Writ, Order or direction, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned Order / intimation dated 01.03.2005 (Exhibit-O herein) issued by the Respondent No.3 informing the Petitioner that his request to protect his seniority in the post of an Executive Engineer (Civil) is once again rejected. ii) By a suitable Writ, order or direction, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to hold and declare that the Petitioner was / is entitled for promotion to the post of an Executive Engineer (Civil) w.e.f. 05.12.1997 or from the date when his Junior came to be promoted i.e. 07.03.1998, and accordingly the Respondents be directed to grant the said deemed date of promotion to the Petitioner. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the Petitioner was appointed on 3rd February 1975 as a Sub Engineer (Civil) with Respondent No.1 Corporation. In May 1984, the Petitioner came to be promoted...
Hoshang Pesi Hodiwala Vs. Bonny Behramshah Bhathena and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2014
1. The plaintiff is the grand son of the deceased, one B.M. Bhathena who executed a will dated 27th November, 1985 and who expired on 25th May, 1989. The plaintiff has sought to probate the will. The deceased left behind one son and two daughters as his only heirs. They would be entitled to an equal 1/3rd share in the estate of the deceased on intestacy. The plaintiff is the son of one of the daughters. The son of the deceased challenged the will of the deceased sought to be probated by the plaintiff. He is survived by the defendants. The estate of the deceased consists essentially of one bungalow at 4-bungalows, Andheri, Versova, Mumbai. The defendant / caveator was residing in the said bungalow. The deceased was also earlier residing in the said bungalow. After 1970 it is disputed whether the deceased lived in the said bungalow. The deceased lived in Pune. One of his daughters also lived in Pune. 2. The defendant has contended that the signatures of the deceased on pages 1 and 2 are ...
The Divisional Controller, Maharashtra State Road, Transport Corporati ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-2014
Oral Judgment:1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by the consent of the parties.2. The petitioner-M.S.R.T.C. contends that the respondent was appointed as a daily wager on 27-03-1991. He was entered on the P.F. role on 15-06-1991. He was a bus driver. He was taken on temporary time scale with effect from 14-02-1992.3. The respondent was driving a bus which was involved in an accident on 18-11-1992. The said accident resulted in the death of three persons and seriously injured one person. As a consequence the respondent was dismissed on 16-03-993 after conducting a domestic enquiry under the Discipline and Appeal Rules of the petitioner.4. The respondent challenged his dismissal by filing complaint (ULP) No. 198 of 1993 before the Labour Court at Jalgaon. By its judgment and order dated 13-01-2000, the complaint was dismissed. The enquiry was held to be fair and proper and the findings of the Enquiry Officer were held to be sustainable.5. The respondent filed revis...
ITM Trust, Bombay and Others Vs. Educate India Society, Gurgaon
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-15-2014
G.S. Patel, J. 1. The Plaintiffs claim to have a trade mark, ITM, registered under Class-41 (educational services) since 2004. They allege infringement of and passing off in respect of this mark by the Defendant, and seek suitable injunctions. The suit is an action in trademark infringement combined with a cause of action in passing off. The petition under Cl. XIV of the Letters Patent for leave to combine the cause of action in passing off with the cause of action in infringement was contested. Leave was granted by a reasoned order and judgment of Mr. Justice Kathawalla on 22nd February 2012. 2. This is the present Notice of Motions second lease of life. It was earlier dismissed on 20th July 2012, on a finding that the contesting marks were dissimilar. The Defendants plea of honest and concurrent user was not considered. The matter was carried in appeal. The order of the learned single Judge was set aside by consent in the Appeal Court, and the matter remitted, but only for a consider...
Usha Shrikant Rege Vs. Gauri Gajanan Rege
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-15-2014
1. This petition is filed for Letters of Administration with the Will of the deceased one Mangesh Pandurang Rege dated 1st October, 1971 annexed thereto. There are two executors appointed in the will, both of whom are stated to have expired prior to the filing of the petition. The deceased is shown to have left behind his widow, four sons, one married daughter and widows and daughters of two deceased sons. 2. Six consent affidavits have been filed. Two caveats have been filed. One caveatrix has withdrawn the caveat. The only challenge is by the present caveatrix/defendant who is widow of the deceased son of the deceased. 3. The caveat claims that the will has been obtained by fraud, coercion and an undue influence practiced by the original petitioner. It was obtained without explaining the contents to the deceased at the time of obtaining his thumb impression. It also takes exception to inordinate delay of 19 years in filing the petition. It sets out the position of the family properti...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »