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.
State of Maharashtra and Another Vs. Tukaram Anantha Dere and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-24-2015
Oral Judgment: (Anoop V. Mohta, J.) 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. 2. The Petitioner/State Government has challenged order dated 4/3/2015, passed by Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT) in O.A. No. 991 of 2014. Operative part of which reads as under: (a) Shri R. H. Maria is directed to personally pay cost of Rs. 20,000/-. The cost be deposited by Shri R.H. Maria from his personal Bank Account, by cheque to be drawn in the name of Registrar, Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai from his own account within six weeks from the date of receipt of the order. (b) Mr G. H. Mohanty to pay cost of Rs. 1,000/- by cheque from his own account in the name of Registrar, Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai within six weeks from the date of receipt of the order. (c) In view of the compliance of order dated 18.11.2014, passed in this Original Application, Original Application is disposed of. (d) Applicants shall be free to agitate challe...
Ali Asgar Siraj Komtiwala Vs. V.S. Singh, the Principal Secretary (App ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-24-2015
G.S. Kulkarni, J. 1. This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenges the order of detention dated 27.3.2015 passed by respondent No.1 passed under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short 'the COFEPOSA') preventive detaining one Burhan Fakhruddin Khatumdi (for short 'the detenu'). The detention order has been passed to prevent the detenu from indulging in smuggling of goods in future. The petitioner is the brother-in-law of the detenu. 2. The factual background which according to the detaining authority forms the basis to pass the impugned detention order is that an intelligence was received by the Officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Mumbai, that two passengers by name Piyush Jasraj Soni and Smt.Sakina Barafwala who were holding Indian passport would arrive by Oman Air Flight from Muscat on 22.1.2015. These passengers would be carrying foreign marked gold bars and...
Bharat Choksey and Others Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-24-2015
Oral Judgment: (A.S. Oka, J.) 1. Rule has been already issued in this Petition. In view of various orders passed by this Court, and considering the status of the building subject matter of this Petition that we have taken up this Petition for final hearing. The building subject matter of this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is known as General Assurance Building located at 232 Dr. D.N. Road, Fort, Mumbai400 001. The said building was constructed in the year 1908. It is not in dispute that the First Respondent Life Insurance Corporation of India (for short the LIC?) which is constituted under the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 is the owner of the said building. The claim of the First Respondent is that it is the Lessee of the land below the said building. The challenge in the Petition as originally filed is to the notice issued under Section 354 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (for short the said Act of 1888?) which records that the build...
Sheshrao and Others Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-24-2015
Oral Judgment: (S.S. Shinde, J.) 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties. 2. This application has been filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, praying therein for quashing the F.I.R. No. M-Case 3/2013 dated 05.02.2013 registered at Police Station, Ambad, chargesheet filed against the applicants on the basis of the said F.I.R. and also further proceedings in Criminal Case bearing R.C.C. No. 117/2014 pending against the applicants in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ambad. 3. Respondent No.2 herein, filed F.I.R. on 5th February, 2013. After investigation, the chargesheet was filed by the concerned Investigating Officer and the case has been registered as R.C.C. No. 117/2014, which is pending before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ambad. 4. This Court has already rejected the application of applicant nos. 1 to 3. Therefore, the further adjudication of this applicati...
The State of Maharashtra and Others Vs. Rajkumar and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-24-2015
A.I.S. Cheema, J. 1. The State has filed the present Criminal Appeal No.413 of 2005 against acquittal of Respondent “ original accused Rajkumar Dhanade. Criminal Revision No.97 of 2005 came to be filed by Laxman Karande, the father of deceased Victim Nilesh Karande, while Criminal Revision No.102 of 2005 was filed by injured PW-3 Anup Mundada. The Respondent accused was prosecuted for the murder of Nilesh Karande and attempt to commit murder of PW-3 Anup, in Sessions Case No.41 of 2002 and was acquitted of both the charges by Ist Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Beed on 30th December 2004. Case of Prosecution 2. In a nutshell the case of prosecution is as under: (A). On 10th January 2002 victim Nilesh was brought to the Rural Hospital Georai, DistBeed. Doctor at Georai found Nilesh to be dead when he was brought to the hospital in auto rickshaw. In another auto rickshaw, injured PW-3 Anup Mundada was also taken to the same hospital but looking to his injuries, Doctor forwarded hi...
Govindlal Motilal Jhawar (Deceased Through his L.Rs. and Others Vs. Ka ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-23-2015
1. The proceeding is filed against judgment and order of Regular Civil Appeal Nos. 317/2011 and 329/2011 delivered by the learned Ad-hoc District Judge-3, Ahmednagar. The District Court has confirmed the judgment and decree of trial Court delivered in Regular Civil Suit No. 305/2002 and the suit was pending in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, Ahmednagar. The suit was filed for eviction by present respondent No. 1 against the applicants, tenants on the ground of bonafide requirement for personal use and also on other grounds. The appellate Court has held that on the ground of bonafide requirement the landlord is entitled to the decree of possession. Both the sides are heard. 2. The suit property is described as C.T.S. No. 3576/1 which is described with local body as House No. 3649. It is a two storied building constructed on the plot of 49 x 16 fts. On the eastern side of the suit property, there is Mahatma Gandhi Road, which is the main road of the city and the suit property ...
Sangamma Kolkar and Another Vs. Vasudev Gaonkar and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-23-2015
1. The present appeal is preferred by the original claimants against the judgment and award passed by the Presiding Officer of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Salcete, Margao, in Claim Petition No. 173/2008 dated 23.04.2010, by which the learned Presiding Officer has awarded compensation of Rs.1,60,500/- together with 9% interest inclusive of the amount awarded under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the parents of the deceased came to this Court. 2. The parties are referred to their original status. 3. The brief facts of the case may be stated as follows: The claimants/appellants have claimed total compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- on account of death of their son Manju Kolkar in the motor vehicular accident which took place on 03.09.2008 at about 17.10 hours near Samson Bar. At the relevant time, the deceased Manju was proceeding on Hero cycle along with pillion rider Shabir from Amori air-conditioned family bar and restauran...
Shivaji Raghunath Dhadam Vs. The State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-2015
A.S. Gadkari, J. 1. The appellant, original accused no.1, has challenged the judgment and order dated 29th August 1992 passed in Sessions Case No.188 of 1991 by the Joint District Judge and Additional Sessions Judge, Satara thereby convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. By the same judgment and order dated 29th August 1992, the Trial court was pleased to acquit the original accused nos.2 to 4 for offence for which they were charged. The appellant has impugned the said judgment and order herein. 2.The facts which can be enumerated from the record, may briefly be stated thus: (i) Shri Chandru Bapu Waidande (PW-3), police patil of the village Chalkewadi who was also holding additional charge of Kumbhargaon since 1982. That on 31.7.1991 one Vasant Vithal More came to his house and informed him that there was murder of Ramesh Pandurang Dhadam. The said More had also informed Shri Waidande that the o...
Shivaji Raghunath Dhadam Vs. The State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-2015
A.S. Gadkari, J. 1. The appellant, original accused no.1, has challenged the judgment and order dated 29th August 1992 passed in Sessions Case No.188 of 1991 by the Joint District Judge and Additional Sessions Judge, Satara thereby convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. By the same judgment and order dated 29th August 1992, the Trial court was pleased to acquit the original accused nos.2 to 4 for offence for which they were charged. The appellant has impugned the said judgment and order herein. 2.The facts which can be enumerated from the record, may briefly be stated thus: (i) Shri Chandru Bapu Waidande (PW-3), police patil of the village Chalkewadi who was also holding additional charge of Kumbhargaon since 1982. That on 31.7.1991 one Vasant Vithal More came to his house and informed him that there was murder of Ramesh Pandurang Dhadam. The said More had also informed Shri Waidande that the o...
P. Beenitha Vs. Jose C.R. Pires and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-23-2015
1. The present appeal is preferred by the original claimant against the judgment and award dated 20.10.2009 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panaji, in Claim Petition No. 6/2004 by which the learned Presiding Officer has dismissed the Claim Petition. 2. The parties are referred to their original status. 3. The brief facts of the case may be stated as follows: The claimant/appellant was 6 years old student residing at Government Quarters at Altinho, Panaji. On the day of the accident i.e. on 17.08.2000 at around 01.30 p.m. the claimant/appellant had returned from the school along with other children and was on the side of the road, at that time the respondent no.1 who was driving the vehicle involved in the accident gave dash to the claimant/appellant. The motor vehicular accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the vehicle i.e. motor vehicle bearing registration No. GA-01-G-0640 belonging to the respondent no.2. The accide...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »