Mumbai Court December 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.
P. Ravi Vs. Police Inspector, Pernem Police Station and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Dec-14-2015
C.V. Bhadang, J. 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Mr. Rivankar, learned Public Prosecutor waives service for the respondent no. 1 and Ms. Collasso, learned Counsel waives service for the respondent no. 2. Heard finally, by consent of the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner is seeking quashing of FIR No. 108/2015, registered by P.S. Pernem against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 447, 323 read with Section 149 of I.P.C. and Section 8 of the Goa Children's Act, 2003 (the Act of 2003, for short). The FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint lodged by Mr. Michael D'Souza, Jerome Mendes and Jason Rodrigues. It was alleged that on 25.06.2015 at 5 p.m., the petitioner alongwith 60 to 70 unknown persons entered in the property of Diago Francis Rodrigues, being Survey No. 2/70 of village Tiracol and the petitioner assaulted Master Jason Rodrigues, aged 17 years, with kicks. All the accused persons assaulted the complainants, thereby caus...
Vaijayata Deepak Warke and Others Vs. State Election Commission and Ot ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-11-2015
1] Rule, in each of these petitions. With the consent of and at the request of learned counsel for the parties, Rule is made returnable forthwith. 2] The final hearing in these petitions concluded on 3 December 2015 and the judgment was reserved. However, as the learned counsel for the Petitioners pointed out that the last date for filing of nomination for election to the Panchyat was 4 December 2015, an interim order was made staying the disqualification incurred by the Petitioners. The interim order dated 3 December 2015 reads thus: 1. The final hearing in these petitions has just been concluded. The Judgment is reserved. However, the learned Counsel for petitioners points out that elections to the Panchayat are scheduled shortly and the last date for filing nominations is 04/12/2015. Accordingly, it is necessary to make an interim order. 2. The petitioners in these petitions have been disqualified under Section 14B of The Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 ('said Act') for fai...
Municipal Corporation of City of Jalgaon Sardar Vallabbhai Patel Tower ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Dec-11-2015
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent heard both sides for final disposal. 2. The proceeding is filed by the Jalgaon Municipal Corporation to challenge the order made by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon on application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code by the present petitioner. The suit is filed by present respondent and he opposed the application. The Civil Court has rejected the application. 3. Present respondent is occupying one shop premises belonging to the petitioner “ Corporation. The period of lease is over and so a show cause notice is issued against the respondent by the Corporation as provided under section 81-B of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act?). After receipt of this notice, present respondent filed application before Collector by mentioning that he was filing application under section 80(1) of the Act and he requested the Collector to declare him as a tenant under t...
Santosh Kanta Assoldekar Vs. The Official Liquidator of M/s. National ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Dec-11-2015
Oral Judgment : 1. Heard Mr. D. Pangam, the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and Ms. Amira Razaq, the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. The above appeal challenges the order passed by the Official Liquidator dated 20/04/2011, whereby the claim put forward by the appellant came to be rejected. 3. Mr. D. Pangam, the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant has pointed out that the appellant was a workman in the establishment of the company in liquidation and that as his dues were not paid, the workman raised claims with that regard before different authorities. The learned Counsel further pointed out that at the time when the company in liquidation went on strike, it ultimately led to its closure. The learned Counsel also points out that somewhere in the year 2001 there was a settlement arrived before the Conciliation Officer between the Union to which the appellant belongs, with the company in liquidation. The learned Counsel further points out that thereaft...
Salman Salim Khan Vs. The State of Maharashtra (Through: Bandra Police ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-2015
1. Present Criminal Appeal is preferred by the appellant/accused challenging the judgment and order of conviction dated 6.5.2015. Said order of conviction was passed by the Sessions Court at Bombay in Sessions Case No.240 of 2013. By the impugned judgment and order the appellant/accused was convicted for various offences and sentenced to suffer respective imprisonments and was also directed to pay fine. Following is the operative part of the judgment and order: 1. Accused Salman Salim Khan is convicted u/s.235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the offence punishable u/s.304 II of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of five (5) years and to pay fine of Rs.25,000/ (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), in default to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of six (6) months. 2. Accused Salman Salim Khan is also convicted u/s.235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the offence punishable u/s.338 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced ...
M/s. Amin Warehousing Through its Proprietor Khatunbibi J. Mohd. Yusuf ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-2015
1. Poor drafting of the complaint and the affidavit of evidence, the ambiguities and vagueness therein, has created problems for the complainant, in what was, otherwise, a simple complaint case in respect of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 2. The appellant, a proprietary concern, had filed a complaint through the Constituted Attorney (C.A.) of the proprietor, against a private company “ the Respondent No.1 herein, and its two directors “ the Respondent Nos.1(a) and 1(b) herein, alleging commission of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' or 'the said Act') The complaint related to dishonour of eight cheques, but the Magistrate, after observing that so far as three cheques were concerned, the notice of demand under Clause (b) of the proviso to Section 138 of the Act, was not issued within the statutory period, limited the prosecution of the accused persons onl...
M.S. Constrotech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Dec-10-2015
Oral Judgment: (Smt. Vasanti A. Naik, J.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a declaration that the petitioner is entitled to participate in the tender process initiated by the tender notices bearing no. 423 and 424 displayed by the respondent Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation on its website. The petitioner has challenged the communication of the respondent dated 28-7-2015 disqualifying the bid of the petitioner. The respondent no. 5 published an e-tender on 25-5-2015 vide two separate tender notices bearing no. 423 and 424 for the construction of civic amenities to rehabilitate Village Palsoda and Village Takali Watpal under the Jigaon Project. The estimated cost of the work to be executed in Village Takali Watpal was Rs. 766.192 Lacs and the estimated cost of the work to be executed in Village Palsoda was Rs.753.598 Lacs. The petitioner submitted ...
Kashinath (Deceased) through legal representatives: and Others Vs. Osm ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Dec-10-2015
1. The appeal is filed against judgment and decree of Regular Civil Appeal No. 116/1984 which was pending in District Court, Aurangabad. The appeal of present respondents, original defendants filed against judgment and decree of Special Civil Suit No. 51/1980 is allowed by the District Court and the decree given by the Trial Court of specific performance of contract is set aside. The original plaintiff has filed the present appeal. Both the sides are heard. 2. Two agricultural lands like land bearing Survey No. 18, admeasuring 12 Acre 1 Gunta and Survey No. 14, admeasuring 19 Acres 8 Gunta situated at village Maosala, Tahsil Khultabad, District Aurangabad were owned by Sandu Baig. Land Survey No. 14 is also known as Godhya Ambacha Inam. Sandu is dead and defendants are the successors of Sandu. 3. It is the case of plaintiff appellant - Kashinath that Sandu was in need of money and so, he expressed to plaintiff that he wanted to sell aforesaid two lands. It is the case of plaintiff that...
Mahadev S. More (since deceased by his heirs and legal representatives ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-2015
1. This Court by order dated 3 May 2005 had directed that the writ petition and the second appeal be clubbed and heard together. The reason for this was set out in the order dated 3 May 2005, which reads thus: 1. This Petition was heard extensively for final decision and during the course of hearing it was pointed out that Civil Application No. 1289 of 1995 came to be decided by the learned III Additional District Judge at Satara on 31.1.2005. The Appeal was allowed by setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court on 31.8.1994 in RCS No. 105 of 1972. The Appellate Court has declared that the Plaintiffs Sukhdeo Shivba More, his sister Parvatibai, brother Shidu and Arjuna has 1/8th share and Defendant No. 1 Mahadeo Shripati More represented by his legal representatives has share in the property. This decree of the Lower Appellate Court has been challenged in Second Appeal under Stamp No. 8323 of 2005 filed on 30.5.2005 before this Court by the present Petitioners. 2. T...
Nilkanth Laxman Koli Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-2015
Oral Judgment: (Dr. Shalini Phansalkarjoshij, j.) 1. The appellant “ original accused, who stands convicted, by judgment and order dated 29th June, 2005, in Sessions Case No.619 of 2003, of Additional Sessions Judge for Greater Bombay, for the offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months, by this appeal challenges his conviction and sentence. 2. Brief facts of the appeal can be stated as follows: Deceased Bharati was the wife of appellant. Their marriage had taken place on 25th April, 2002 at Madh village. After the marriage, they were residing together in the same village. As per prosecution case, appellant was suspecting the fidelity of his wife Bharati and on that count there used to be frequent quarrels. On the day of incident, on 13.7.2003, in the morning, the appellant quarrelled with the deceased and then left the hou...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »