Mumbai Court March 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.
Naran Lala Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ion Exchange (India) Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-10-2015
1. Rule returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned Counsel for the parties and at their request, taken up for final hearing. 2. This petition challenges the order dated 25.11.2014 passed by the learned Judge of City Civil Court at Bombay, whereby Notice of Motion taken out by the petitioner / original defendants for a relief under Order 7 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908 to return the plaint to be filed before the appropriate Court for want of jurisdiction, has been rejected. Briefly the facts are:- 3. The respondents filed a Summary Suit No.668 of 2014 before the City Civil Court at Bombay under Order 37 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the petitioner praying for decree against the petitioner for principal sum of Rs.40,22,294/- alongwith interest. It was the respondents' case in the suit that the liability of the suit claim had arisen out of two purchase orders dated 20.8.2010 and 4.8.2010 issued by the petitioner in favour of the respondents. The relevant...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Hindustan Coca Cala Beverages Pvt. ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Mar-10-2015
Oral Judgment: (F.M. Reis, J.) 1. Heard Ms. Susan Linhares, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant and Mr. V. Menezes, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent. 2. The above appeal came to be admitted by an order dated 21.4.2009 on the following substantial questions of law:- 1. Whether, the service tax paid on mobile phones used by employees/staff of a manufacturing company would be eligible for cenvat credit under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004? Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding their the Board's Circular No.59/8/2003-ST dated 20.6.2003 specifically clarifying that service tax paid on mobile phone is not eligible for cenvat credit is in applicable under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004? 3. Ms. Linhares, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has pointed out that as per the circular dated 20.6.2004 at clause 2.8, mobile phones are not covered. The learned counsel has further pointed out that as the mobile phones were not covered and considering the saving clause in...
Rahul Gandhi, M.P. Vice President, Indian National Congress Vs. Rajesh ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-10-2015
1. Admitted. By consent of the parties taken up forthwith for final hearing. 2. The Petitioner is member of Parliament and is vice president of Indian National Congress (I.N.C.). He is aggrieved by the order passed by the 3rd Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bhiwandi in OMA/353/2014 dated 11-7-2014 summoning the Petitioner to appear before him and to answer the charge for the offence punishable under section 500 of the IPC. The process has been issued on the complaint filed by Respondent No.1. The Respondent No.1 is a resident of Bhiwandi (District-Thane) and claims to be a member of RashtriyaSwayamsevak Sangh(R.S.S.) since childhood. At present he is working as Karyawah(Secretary) of RashtriyaSwayamsevak Sangh, Bhiwandi Taluka. 3. He has alleged that there was a rally of I.N.C. on 632014 at village Sonale near Bhiwandi for parliament election campaign. The rally was addressed by the Petitioner. It is alleged that the Petitioner during the course of address to the public and media had...
Johnson and Johnson Employees' Union Vs. The Commissioner, Employees P ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-10-2015
RevatiMohite Dere, J. 1. By this petition, preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner Union seeks the following principal reliefs: (a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directing the Respondent No.1 to forthwith recall, rescind and / or revoke its decision to treat Account No. MH/18838 as an inoperative account; (b) That this Honble Court be pleased to issue further appropriate writ, order or directions, directing Respondent No. 1 to credit Account No. MH/18838 with interest due on and from 01.04.2011 till date and further till closure of the account by permissible withdrawal thereof by the employees. 2. Few facts as are germane for deciding the petition are: The petitioner is a registered trade union incorporated under the Trade Unions Act. The first respondent is the Commissioner of Employees P...
The State of Maharashtra Vs. Maheboob Khan and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-09-2015
S.S. Shinde, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the State of Maharashtra, aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded on 22nd December, 1995, in Sessions Case No.129 of 1995, thereby acquitting the Respondents for the offence punishable under section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under :- (a) That, the complainant Keshav Chavan is the resident of village Sangvi Bk. Taluka and District Nanded. He earns his livelihood by doing the work of labourer. Village Sangvi is located close to Nanded City. He had two younger brothers namely (1) Narayan and (2) Yadav (deceased). Yadav, the brother of the complainant was residing separately from the complainant. The age of Yadav at the relevant time was 20 years. He was also earning his livelihood by doing labour work. (b) Accused Nos. 1 to 3 are real brothers. They are residing at village Sangvi. Accused No.1 is the tricycle rickshaw puller. Accused N...
Deepak Vallabhji Dedhia and Another Vs. The State of Maharashtra Throu ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-09-2015
AnujaPrabhudessai, J. 1. This is a petition for quashing of C.R. No.59 of 2012 registered against the present petitioners by the Economic Offence Wing, under Sections 406, 420, 380, 467 and 120B of the IPC. The petitioners have also claimed compensation of Rs.25 lakhs each towards arrest and illegal detention in the aforesaid crime. 2. The petitioners are the partners of the firm M/s. Ketki Developers having its office on the ground floor of the building Anamika, Veer Savarkar Marg, Navpada, Thane. The said partnership firm is engaged in the business of buying and selling of land as well as development of real estate. 3. The respondent no.3 is the partner of M/s. Satyam Builders, which is in the business of construction. Mr. Meghaji Chedda and his son Mr. Ashok Chedda are also the partners of M/s. Satyam Builders. Mr. Ashok Chedda is the brother-in-law of the petitioner no.1 Deepak Dedia. 4. M/s. Satyam Builders had lodged a complaint dated 12.04.2012 before the Matunga Police Station ...
Panjabrao Vs. The State of Maharashtra, Through its, Principal Secreta ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-09-2015
A.M. Badar, J. 1. Heard. Rule. With consent of parties, heard finally. 2. By this petition, the petitioner is challenging notifications dated 19.3.2014 and 13.8.2014 issued by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra, Revenue and Forest Department and is praying for declaring them ultra-vires Section 26 read with First Schedule to The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for sake of brevity Act of 2013) and for quashing those notifications, as well as notice dated 6.8.2012, issued under Section 9(3)(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ( For sake of brevity Act of 1894). The petitioner is further praying for directing respondents to calculate market value of his land proposed to be acquired for construction of water storage tank at village Patoda by applying multiplier of two. 3. Facts in brief, are thus:- Respondent/State Government has decided to construct a storage tank at village Patoda in Taluka Ma...
Ravindra @ Ravi Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-09-2015
S.S. Shinde, J. 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is praying for quashing and setting aside impugned judgment and order No. 2013/MAG/CR-03 dated 4/8/2014 passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jalna Sub-Division, Jalna thereby externing the petitioner from the boundaries of Jalna and Aurangabad districts for a period of two years. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner confined his arguments to only one ground that, without recording subjective satisfaction and reasons in the externment order, the petitioner is externed from two districts i.e. Jalna and Aurangabad. It is submitted that, offences which are registered against the petitioner are in Kadim Jalna Police Station located at Jalna. It is submitted that, even the alleged prejudicial activities of the petitioner, as stated in the show-cause notice, are in the vici...
Buldana Urban Co-operative Society Ltd. Through its Regional Manager V ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Mar-09-2015
1. The short issue that arises for consideration in this writ petition is whether the period of sixty days for preferring an appeal under the provisions of Section 45AA of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short 'the said Act') should be reckoned from the date of such order or whether such period should be counted from the date of its actual communication. 2. Rule. Heard finally with consent of learned counsel for the parties. 3. In proceedings under Section 45A of the said Act, the Deputy Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation directed the petitioner to pay contribution towards the Employees State Insurance for the period from 1-9-2009 to 30-9-2010. This order dated 22-3-2013 was dispatched by the office of the respondent no. 1 to the petitioner by Registered Post Acknowledgment Due on 22-3-2013 and the same was received by the petitioner society on 28-3-2013. The petitioner society preferred appeal under the provisions of Section 45AA of the said Act on 22-5-20...
Shriram and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-09-2015
S.S. Shinde, J. 1. Criminal Appeal No. 111 of 2006 is filed by the original accused, who are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 326 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs. 1,500/- each, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. So also accused no.2 is further convicted in respect of offence punishable under section 506 of I.P. Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs. 1500/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. Criminal Appeal No. 573 of 2006 is filed by the State of Maharashtra for enhancement of sentence and also the original complainant has also filed Criminal Revision Application No. 70 of 2006 praying therein for convicting the accused for offence under Section 307 read with section 34 of I.P. Code and also the acquittal order of accused of the offence punishable under section 307 read with...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »