Mumbai Court October 2015 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 Corporatio ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Oct-26-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. This petition was admitted by order dated 27/04/2006. 2. On 17/04/2009, this Court passed the following order: 1. Heard. 2. The recovery notices issued by the petitioner were held to be improper vide the impugned order dated 30,9,2005, rendered by the Industrial Court, Latur. 3. The learned Advocate for the petitioner states that the employees are now likely to be superannuated and the recovery will become impossible. Therefore, she seeks interim relief. 4. Mr.Yenge, learned advocate appearing for the Respondent is said to have been now in the panel of advocates of the petitioner and, therefore, Mr.M.P.Gude, learned advocate has filed vakilpatra for the Respondent. The name of Mr.Yenge, be deleted and he be deemed as discharged instead of Mr.M.P.Gude's appearance be shown. 5. The petitioner is at liberty to withhold the disputed amount from the final payments to be made to the members of the Respondent No.1 at the time of payment of the retiral benefits but not from t...
Deepak Bhagwan Vyas and Others Vs. Prakash Bachcharaj Jailwal
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Oct-26-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard the matter finally by consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties. 2. In Special Civil Suit No. 24 of 2014 for specific performance of contract, the trial Court rejected the application at Exh.10 on 12.06.2015 for grant of temporary injunction restraining the defendants from disturbing the peaceful possession of the plaintiff over the suit property. In Misc. Civil Appeal No. 38 of 2015, preferred by the plaintiff, the lower appellate Court has set aside the decision of the trial Court on 15.07.2015 and the application at Exh. 10 has been allowed, granting injunction restraining the defendants from disturbing and interfering with the possession of the plaintiff over the suit property pending the decision of the suit. 3. The Court has to find out whether prima facie the plaintiff has proved his possession over the suit property. The lower appellate Court has relied upon the agreement for extension of time executed betw...
Jayant Bhimsen Joshi and Others Vs. Shri Raghavendra Bhimsen Joshi and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2015
1. This Appeal from Order is directed against the order dated 27.9.2013 passed by the 5th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune granting ad-interim injunction against defendant Nos.1 to 4. The defendants have filed this appeal against the said order. However, pursuant to the amendment in Maharashtra Civil Courts Act, in 2015, which came into effect from 1.9.2015, the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Court to entertain an appeal under section 28(A) of the Maharashtra Civil Courts Act is increased upto Rs.1 crore, inter alia, an oral application is made to transfer this appeal to the District Court. This oral application is opposed vehemently by the appellants on the ground that the appeal is valued exceeding Rs.1 crore and, therefore, it cannot be transferred. The plaintiff, a son of the first wife of late Bharatratna Bhimsen Joshi, has filed the suit for declaration, partition and injunction, against his real and step brothers and sisters claiming 1/7th share in the property v...
Vile Parle Kelvani Mandal and Others Vs. Municipal Corporation of Grea ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2015
A.S. Oka, J. 1. In these two Petitions, the grievance is regarding the failure of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation to take action against illegal hawking. FACTS OF PIL NO.36 OF 2010 2. PIL No.36 of 2010 has been filed by the second Petitioner appearing in person who is the President of the first Petitioner along with one Shri Dattaram Kumkar. This Petition has been filed inviting the attention of the Court to the illegal hawking activities on the Gulmohar Road which connects to S.V.Road and Juhu Tara Road and Versova Road through Link Road which is a 100 feet wide extremely busy road. It is pointed out that on a 600 meter stretch of the said road between the Mithibai College-NMIMS College junction to the Cooper Hospital junction, there are large number of educational institutions in which about 25,000 students are studying. It is pointed out that on this road, there is a large vehicular traffic and pedestrian movement as well. Apart from the educational institutions and the Cooper Hosp...
Laxmibai Govind Bhat Korde Vs. Yeshwant Palni, (Since deceased) Repres ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-23-2015
Oral Judgment 1. Heard Shri S. D. Lotlikar, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Appellants and Shri G. Agni, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents. 2. The above Appeal came to be admitted on 17.09.2009, on the following substantial question of law: "(1) Whether the impugned judgment and decree is vitiated for failure on the part of the First Appellate Court, to appreciate that a Civil Suit is to be decided on preponderance of probability and the Trial Court after concluding that the plaintiff had established title as well as possession in respect of the suit property, had decreed the suit of the Appellant against the defendant, who was found by the Trial Court to have neither title, nor possession in respect of any part of the property surveyed under No. 118/0, particularly in view of the fact that the First Appellate Court found nothing wrong in the Trial Court's finding that the defendant had failed to establish such title or possession? (2) Whether the appreciation of ...
Dr. Mohammad Ali Nawabsaheb Wadwan (since deceased through LRs.) Vs. T ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2015
A.S. Oka, J. 1. By this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to acquire the land of the petitioners more particularly described in paragraph 2 of the petition. The prayer is either for issuing the aforesaid direction or for the restoration of the vacant and peaceful possession of the land described in paragraph 2 of the petition (for short `the said land') to the petitioners within the time fixed by this Court. The second substantive prayer is for directing the respondents to decide the representations dated 22nd January 2008 and 13th February 2008. The third prayer is for setting aside the notice dated 18th October 2007 issued by the State Government under sub section (1) of section 41 of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976 (for short `the MHADA Act'). By the said notice published in official Gazette, the owners of the said land were called upon to show cause within a p...
CTR Manufacturing Industries Limited Vs. SERGI Transformer Explosion P ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2015
(For convenience, the various sections in the official copy of this judgment begin on new pages, and portions of some section-ending pages may therefore be blank. This is deliberate and is to be ignored.) CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...................................................................................4 CHRONOLOGY.......................................................................................8 ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMERS....................................................... 18 CTR™S PATENT....................................................................................24 THE DTL TENDER SPECIFICATIONS ............................................32 CTR™S CASE IN INFRINGEMENT.................................................... 33 THE CONTESTING EXPERT OPINIONS......................................... 36 SCHEMATICS.......................................................................................40 COMBINATION PATENTS and MOSAICING.................................
The New India Assurance Company Limited and Others Vs. Ramrao Lala Bor ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2015
Revati Mohite Dere, J. 1. Rule. Rule is made returnable with the consent of the parties forthwith and is taken up for final hearing. 2. The Appellant “ Insurance Company has taken exception to the Judgment and Award dated 21st July, 2014 passed by the learned District Judge “ 5 and Additional Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Thane at Thane, by which the Respondent “ Claimants were awarded compensation of Rs.61,55,000/- with simple interest @ 9% per annum from the date of the petition till its realization. 3. The impugned award has been challenged by the Appellant “ Company on several counts, viz., (i) that the issue of negligence has not been proved ; (ii) that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is contrary to the established legal principles. It is contended that though the last salary certificate of the deceased reflected his salary as Rs.2,800/- per month, the Tribunal has erred in concluding the income of the deceased to be Rs.40,000/- per month...
The Indian Express Limited and Another Vs. Chandra Prakash Shivhare
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2015
1. The Plaintiffs, the owners and proprietors of the popular and well known Indian Express? group of newspapers and publications seek an injunction against the Defendant restraining him from infringing their registered trade mark Indian Express?. The Plaintiffs have set out the inter se devolution of title between them. This is not immediately germane, not being disputed. The 2nd Plaintiff is the registered proprietor of various trade marks and it has assigned these to the 1st Plaintiff, today the subsequent proprietor. 2. The Defendant says that he is a publisher as much by occupation as inclination. He is a resident of Ganeshpura, Morena, Madhya Pradesh. There, he claims to have begun and carried on for a short time the publication and limited distribution of a journal or a newspaper with the name Indian Express?, written, however, in Devnagari. It is this action that prompted the present suit. 3. The Plaintiffs are two of several companies and corporate entities in the Indian Expres...
Maria Christine Rebillet Perdriau and Another Vs. Goa Coastal Zone Aut ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Oct-23-2015
F.M. Reis, J. 1. Heard Mrs. Anarkali Agni, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners, Ms. Purna Bhandari, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent nos. 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, Mr. Shivan Desai, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent no.5 and Mr. Jitendra Supekar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 6 and 7. 2. Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents waives service. 3. The above petitioners inter alia seeks a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ direction or order quashing and setting aside the order dated 29.5.2015 passed by the learned National Green Tribunal, Western Zone at Pune. 4. Briefly the facts of the case are that the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 had filed a petition being Writ Petition No. 872/2012 inter-alia challenging the construction activities being carried out by the re...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »