Mumbai Court July 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.
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation and Another Vs. Pandurang ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. This petition has been admitted by the order dated 11.09.1997. Interim relief was granted to the Petitioner and the Respondent was permitted to work as an Assistant Artisan (Mechanical). It is informed that the Respondent has already superannuated on 30.04.2001. 2. Considering the extensive arguments of the learned Advocates appearing for the Petitioner and the Respondent, I am not required to advert to all of their submissions in the light of the subsequent events and in the light of the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab v/s Krishan Niwas reported in AIR 1997 SC 2349. 3. For clarity, the Respondent joined the duties with the Petitioner on 04.10.1977 as an Artisan-A. An accident occurred at the hands of the Respondent while on duty, causing extensive damage to the vehicle. The damage was assessed at Rs.25,000/- in 1988. The charge sheet was issued, inquiry was conducted and the Respondent was dismissed from service by way of punis...
The State of Maharashtra Vs. Santosh Baban Madhe
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2015
S.S. Shinde, J. 1. This Criminal Appeal is filed by the Appellant “ State, challenging the Judgment and Order dated 10.01.2014 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sangamner in Sessions Case No.25/2012, thereby acquitting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P. Code. The prosecution case, in brief, is as under: 2. Complainant Manisha Bharat Bhutambare, resident at village Pavaldara, Taluka Parner, District Ahmednagar, lodged a complaint at Exhibit-11 on 21.12.2011 before Ghargaon Police Station, alleging that, her mother was deserted by her father. Therefore, her mother was residing at village Ghargaon-Shelkewadi along with grandmother of complainant. Since last 2-3 Years prior to the incident, her mother was residing along with accused at village Kelewadi, as there were illicit relations in between them. 4. On 21.12.2011, accused made a phone call to the brother-in-law of complainant on Mobile and informed that, mother of complainant Rakhamabai died ...
Carlton Fortes Vs. Devkikrishna Ravalnath Devasthan Pandavada and Othe ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-01-2015
Oral Judgment: (F.M. Reis, J.) 1. Heard Shri J.A.Lobo, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, Shri V.R.Tamba, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.1 and Ms. Rodrigues, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 2 and 3. 2. Admit. Heard forthwith by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents, waives service. 3. The notice issued to the respondents also indicated that the appeal may be disposed of finally at the stage of admission itself. 4. The above appeal challenges the order dated 21st of June 2013 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panaji, in Special Civil Suit No.34/2011/B whereby the application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 filed by the respondent no.1 came to be allowed and consequently, the plaint filed by the appellant came to be rejected. 5. The brief facts of the case may be summarized as follows:- The suit came to be filed by the appellant...
Dnyaneshwar Vs. The Superintendent Engineer, Public Works Division and ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-01-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by the consent of the parties. 2. The issue raised before me is as to when would the Labour Court / Tribunal be rendered FUNCTUS OFFICIO? under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the Industrial Disputes (Bombay) Rules, 1957. 3. Though this case reveals peculiar facts, there is no dispute with regard to the facts pertaining to Ref.(IDA) No.90/1996, which are recorded as under: a. The petitioner was engaged as a skilled labourer w.e.f. 01/04/1985. b. He was terminated on 20/09/1996 under oral orders. c. Kalelkar Award is applicable to the respondent establishment. d. An industrial dispute with regard to his termination was raised by the petitioner. e. Owing to the failure of the conciliation proceedings, the Deputy Commissioner, Labour, Aurangabad/Appropriate Authority, by order dated 20/09/1996 referred the dispute to the Labour Court, Solapur. f. The petitioner, who was second party workman, submitted his state...
Rajendra and Another Vs. The State of Maharashtra, through Anti Corrup ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-01-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. These two appeals can be disposed of by this common judgment, since both arise out of the judgment and order of conviction, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Beed, dated 5.8.2000 in Special Case No.14 of 1991. Initially common appeal was filed, however, vide order, dated 25.7.2012 Govardhan Bajirao Tandale-appellant no.2 in Criminal Appeal No. 356 of 2000 was permitted to file separate appeal. Therefore, he filed separate appeal and it is registered as Criminal Appeal No. 498 of 2012. 2. Appellants in these two appeals will be referred to by their original position in this judgment. Appellant Rajendra Dhondiba Jogdand is accused no.1 and appellant Govardhan Bajirao Tandale is accused no.2. 3. By the judgment and order of conviction in Special Case No. 14 of 1991, dated 5.8.2000. the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Beed, convicted accused no.1 for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and direc...
Anil Hoble Vs. Kashinath Jairam Shetye and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-01-2015
Oral Order: (F.M. Reis, J.) 1. Heard Shri Nitin Sardessai, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Shri Kashinath Shetye, respondent No.1 in person, Shri A.N.S. Nadkarni, learned Advocate General appearing for the respondents No.5 and 6 and Shri Aires Rodrigues, intervenor in person. 2. The above petition, inter alia, takes exception to the Judgment and Order dated 29th May, 2015 passed by the learned National Green Tribunal, (Western Zone) Bench, Pune “ respondent No.7 in Application No.51/2014. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case in the above writ petition as pointed out by the petitioner, are that the respondents No.1 to 4 filed an application before the respondent No.7 under Section 18(1), read with Sections 14, 15, 16, and 17 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. It is further the contention of the petitioner that it is the case of the said respondents that the petitioner has done an illegal construction and is running a bar and restaurant therein. The petitio...
The Vaishya Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. Represented through ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-01-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. By this appeal the appellant “ complainant is challenging the acquittal of the respondent from the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred as to 'the Act'). 2. Brief facts are that the appellant is a Urban Credit Co-operative Society. Sometime in the year 2003 the appellant had advanced a loan of Rs.2,50,000/- to the respondent. The said loan was repayable in monthly installments of Rs.4,200/- plus accrued interest. The loan was repayable in total sixty monthly installments. According to the appellant, the respondent defaulted in the matter of repayment of the loan and the account had become a non-performing asset. Further, according to the appellant, the respondent approached the appellant and had issued a cheque dated 13th January, 2007 for Rs.3,78,195/- towards repayment of the loan, which got dishonoured for want of sufficient funds. Hence, after issuance of the statutory notice, the appellant filed a comp...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›