Mumbai Court August 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 Secretary and Another Vs. Vaishali Ramdas Thote and Another
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Aug-10-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard. 2. Rule. 3. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith and the petition is taken up for final disposal. 4. Shri Gunale, learned Advocate for the petitioner criticizes the judgment of the School Tribunal dated 10.10.2013. He has raised the following three grounds, which render the impugned judgment perverse:- (a) the first respondent / employee had abandoned her service, (b) she was habituated to unauthorized absenteeism, and (c) her performance was not satisfactory. 5. He submits that the School Tribunal has allowed Appeal No.26 of 2012 filed by the first respondent for challenging her order of termination dated 1.8.2011 on the ground that she was appointed for three years as a probationer w.e.f. 1.8.2008. He further submits that because she was unauthorizedly absent, she was required to be terminated as she had abandoned her service. When her performance was not satisfactory, the employer cannot be compelled to keep such an employee in service. 6. Shri Guna...
Dy. Collector and SDO Mormugao and Others Vs. Confraria Igreza de Cort ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-07-2015
1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 31.01.2008 passed by the learned Ad-Hoc District Judge -1, FTC-I, South Goa, Margao, the appellants have preferred the present appeal and the respondent has preferred the cross objection. 2. The brief facts of the case may be stated as follows: The respondent herein filed a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The description of the immovable properties acquired are as under: (a) survey No.56/2 admeasuring 395 square metres; (b) survey No.56/1 admeasuring 894 square metres; and (c) survey No.56/3 admeasuring 400 square metres situated at Village Cortalim. 3. The Government of Goa vide Notification dated 23.10.1990 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, published in the Goa Government Gazette dated 14.02.1991 notified the subject lands to be acquired for the purpose of construction of a Primary Health Centre at Cortalim. The Government has issued Notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act whi...
Rahul Yashwant Shinde Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-07-2015
P.C. 1. The applications are moved for bail as the applicants/ accused are facing charges for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 507 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code in C.R. No.167 of 2014 registered with Market Yard police station, Pune. 2. It is the case of the prosecution that the complainant Reshma Gade gave information to police on 5th December, 2014 about the assault on her husband Sunil Gade. It is her case that the deceased and the co-accused Anand Pasalkar had a land transaction. Some amount was handed over by the co-accused Anand Pasalkar to the deceased Sunil to purchase the land. The said amount was to be returned to co-accused Anand by the deceased. So there was demand of money from the co-accused. 3. It is the case of the prosecution that on 2nd December, 2014 the deceased Sunil informed his wife that he was going to have a meeting with the co-accused Anand Pasalkar and the applicants /accused at hotel Tiranga and he would dine there. Thereafter, the dece...
Pushpalata Sohanlal Sharma Vs. Smt. Brij Madanlal Sharma and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-07-2015
1. This is a unique suit filed by the plaintiff who is shown to be Pushpalata Sohanlal Sharma @ Pushpa S. Sharma (Pushpa) against the defendants who were two individuals and a limited company. Defendant No.1 is shown to be Brij Madanlal Sharma but also claims to be Pushpa S Sharma / Pushpa Singh Sharma, (Brij). Her husband Madanlal since expired, was defendant No.2 and a company of which Madanlal is stated to be a director, is defendant No.3. Madanlal has expired and his son and daughter are brought on record as his heirs as defendant No.2a and 2b aside from Brij who has continued to be defendant No.1. The case of all the defendants is identical as shall be seen presently. 2. The plaintiff has been represented by the same advocate throughout. The defendants have filed a joint written statement. They were represented by the same advocate all through until the last date of the trial including the stage of recording of cross examination. The advocate who earlier represented all the defend...
Kailas Hanumant Nalawade Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-07-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard rival arguments at length on this appeal preferred by the appellant / original accused No.1 challenging his conviction for the offences punishable under Section 304 (Part II) and 324 of IPC. By the said impugned judgment and order, original accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 were acquitted of both the charges. The present appellant was sentenced to suffer RI for seven years and one year for the respective offences for which he was convicted. The judgment and order of conviction was passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune on 31.1.2015. 2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell is that in the evening of 18.1.2010 PW1 complainant had been to the house of his friend one Arun Shingane (PW-3). That time, said Arun Shingane was not at home but his wife was present. That time, said PW1 had occasion to see one Balasaheb Nalawade (accused No.4) and there was some altercation and hot exchange of words between them. Apparently, some threats were given by said accused No.4 to PW1...
Sulekhabai Yeshwantrao Chowghule (since deceased represented by) Jagde ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-07-2015
1. By this appeal, the appellant is challenging the acquittal of the first respondent from an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (the Act, for short). 2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal may be stated thus: That, the original complainant, Smt. Sulekhabai Chowghule (since deceased) had given a hand loan of Rs.30,00,000/- to the first respondent on 28.04.2009. The complainant is having an account with the Lokmanya Multipurpose Co-operative Credit Society Limited, Baina Branch (the Credit Society, for short). The complainant had requested the said Credit Society to issue a cheque to the first respondent, debiting her Savings Bank Account bearing Account No. 211. At her request, the said Credit Society issued a cheque No. 843394 dated 28.04.2009, drawn on the Oriental Bank of Commerce, in favour of the first respondent. At the request of the Manager of the Credit Society, the Oriental Bank of Commerce transferred a sum of Rs.30,00...
Dy. Collector and SDO Mormugao and Others Vs. Confraria Igreza de Cort ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-07-2015
1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 31.01.2008 passed by the learned Ad-Hoc District Judge -1, FTC-I, South Goa, Margao, the appellants have preferred the present appeal and the respondent has preferred the cross objection. 2. The brief facts of the case may be stated as follows: The respondent herein filed a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The description of the immovable properties acquired are as under: (a) survey No.56/2 admeasuring 395 square metres; (b) survey No.56/1 admeasuring 894 square metres; and (c) survey No.56/3 admeasuring 400 square metres situated at Village Cortalim. 3. The Government of Goa vide Notification dated 23.10.1990 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, published in the Goa Government Gazette dated 14.02.1991 notified the subject lands to be acquired for the purpose of construction of a Primary Health Centre at Cortalim. The Government has issued Notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act whi...
Mohammed Rafic Vs. Mario H. Fernandes and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-07-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The learned Counsel for both the respondents waive service for the respondents. Heard finally with consent. 2. By this petition, the petitioner / accused, is challenging the order issuing warrant of attachment of his flat. 3. The brief facts are that the petitioner was prosecuted for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the N. I. Act, on the basis of a complaint lodged by the first respondent. The petitioner came to be convicted by a judgment dated 30/03/2012 and he was sentenced to pay compensation of Rs.4,25,000/- and in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one month. This was unsuccessfully challenged by the petitioner in Criminal Appeal No.56/2012 before the learned Sessions Judge. The appeal was dismissed on 26/07/2013. It appears that the petitioner did not pay the amount of compensation as awarded and instead, served the sentence awarded in default. Subsequently, a Criminal Miscellaneous Application ...
Helcino Aleixo Fernandes Vs. Milind Madhukar Bhende
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-07-2015
1. Admit. Mr. Ramani, the learned Counsel waives notice for the respondent. Heard finally by consent. As the applications involve common question of law and fact they are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The petitioner herein is the original complainant, who is a businessman residing at Majorda, within the jurisdiction of Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Margao in South Goa District. The respondent happens to be a resident of Mapusa within the jurisdiction of Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Mapusa. The respondent/ accused had obtained a hand loan from the petitioner. Towards repayment of the said loan, the respondent had passed in all 9 cheques in favour of the petitioner. All these cheques were drawn on the account of the respondent with H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd at Panaji within the jurisdiction of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Panaji, North Goa. All these cheques were payable at par at all the branches of H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd. The petitioner presented the cheques for en...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kashinath Naik and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-07-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. By this appeal, the appellant /original opponent no.2 is challenging the judgment and order dated 13/05/2010, passed by the Commissioner Workmen's Compensation, granting a compensation of Rs.3,98,800/- with interest. 2. The brief facts are that now deceased Uttam Naik was a driver employed with the respondent no.3 Yogesh Sharmalkar on a Mini Truck bearing No.GA-01-V-2482. The vehicle met with an accident on 12/03/2004, in which Uttam Naik died. The first and the second respondents, who are the parents of Uttam Naik, filed an application before the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner for compensation in respect of death of Uttam Naik. It was claimed that the accident occurred out of and in the course of employment of Uttam Naik with the third respondent. The said application was initially filed only against the respondent no.3 (original opponent no.1). Subsequently, the present appellant came to be arrayed as opponent no.2 as the appellant had insured the risk arising ...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »