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.
Raivathari Madhupati Singhania and Others Vs. Madhupati Vijaypat Singh ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-21-2015
1. Seventeen years ago, on 30th December 1988, Madhupati and Anuradha Singhania, Defendants Nos. 1 and 2, signed a document styled as a ˜Memorandum of Family Settlement™ (MoFS?) with Madhupati Singhania™s father, Dr. Vijaypat Singhania, the 3rd Defendant. By this document, (At page 41 of the plaint)Madhupati and Anuradha Singhania gifted, transferred or otherwise relinquished rights over several properties, both movable and immovable, while retaining others. The document says they did so to avoid differences of ˜opinion and approach™ between Madhupati Singhania and his father, and matters of ˜tension and discord™ in their respective management styles. This is a reference to the business conglomerate then under the stewardship of Dr. Vijaypat Singhania. The document says that Madhupati and Anuradha Singhania desired to emigrate. The so-called severance is attributed to these factors. 2. Madhupati and Anuradha Singhania signed the MoFS not only f...
Meenadevi Vs. Narmadabai @ Leelabai
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-21-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard submissions at the bar advanced on behalf of the learned Counsel for the appellant. 2. This Second Appeal is preferred against the Judgment and Order passed by the Principal District Judge, Amravati, dt.5.3.2014 in Regular Civil Appeal No.2 of 2008 whereby after setting aside the Judgment and Order passed by the trial Court in Regular Civil Suit No.107 of 1998 passed by 6th Joint Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Amravati on 24.10.2007, the learned 1st Appellate Judge dismissed the suit for possession and removal of encroachment and granted perpetual and mandatory injunction directing the defendant to stop flowing of rain water falling on terrace of the plaintiff and to divert the rain water falling from the outlets mentioned as D1 to D3 away from the approach way. 3. The learned Counsel for the Appellant invited my attention to the fact that the suit was instituted by the plaintiff in respect of the plot admeasuring 3200 sq. ft. bearing plot no.17, Sheet no.48 at mouza Tar...
The Divisional Controller, Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporatio ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by the consent of the parties. 2. Contention of the petitioner is that the respondent was appointed as a conductor in the MSRTC in 1998. On 26-03-2009, the respondent was manning the bus on the Sakri-Nashik road. A flying squad checked the bus at Ozar main gate and found a female passenger travelling from Satana to Nashik to be in possession of Ticket No. 317070 and 176744 for an amount of Rs. 30/- each and one ticket bearing No. 36910 of Rs. 2/- which were unpunched. Similarly, Rs. 28/- in excess were found in the cash bag of the respondent. 3. A charge sheet was issued to the petitioner dated 15-04-2009. A departmental enquiry was conducted. The enquiry officer held the respondent guilty of the charges levelled upon him. A second show cause notice dated 22-10-2009 was issued to the respondent and he was finally dismissed from the Department on 30-12-2009. 4. The respondent preferred Complaint (ULP) No. 20 of 201...
New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Baby Nanda and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-21-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. By this appeal, the appellant-Insurance Company has sought to challenge judgment and award dated 27.8.2002, passed by learned Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Akola, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.113 of 1998, whereby the petition filed by the claimants legal representatives of deceased Devidas Salunke; was allowed holding that the driver/owner of the offending motor vehicle and insurance company shall jointly and severally deposit with the Tribunal amount of Rs.2.00 Lacs towards compensation along with interest at the rate of nine percent per annum from the date of claim petition till realization of the amount. 2. The facts of the case in a nut shell are stated, thus: That deceased Devidas Salunke, by profession, was Cobbler? and an agricultural labourer, we well. He had gone to attend the marriage ceremony at village Kawatha from village Shirsoli, District Akola. On 1.6.1997 while deceased Devidas was returning back to his village Shirsoli by a mot...
Jacinto Da Silva Vs. Maria Filomena Da Silva and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-21-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Shri M. B. D'Costa, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Ms. Asha Desai, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent nos. 1, 14 and 19. 2. The above Writ Petition takes exception to the Judgments dated 30.04.2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division at Margao and the Judgment dated 27.07.2010 passed by the learned Adhoc District Judge, South Goa, at Margao, in Regular Civil appeal no. 74/2008. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that Inventory Proceedings were initiated upon the death of Joao Batista de Silva and his wife Maria Augusta Oliveira. The said estate leavers had four daughters namely Maria Juliata Melda Da Silva, Maria Clara Da Silva, Filomena Da Silva and Maria Natalina Da Silva, three Sale Deeds dated 14.05.1975, 15.07.1977 and 23.02.1979 the said three daughters except Filomena sold their respective illiquid asset/right of inheritance in the estate of their parents Joao Batista da Silva and Maria Augusta Oliveira...
Chandrawati Punu Gaonkar and Others Vs. Nilu Manju Velip and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-21-2015
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr. S.S. Kakodkar, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. C.A. Coutinho, learned Counsel appearing for respondents no.1 to 5. 2. The appeal came to be admitted by an order dated 10/08/2007 on the following substantial questions of law: 2(a) Whether First Appellate Court was right in applying provisions of Benami Transaction Prohibition Act 1988 to conclude that, the suit property was purchased in the name of the father of the Plaintiffs 1, 3, 4 and Defendant No.3 as he was major and elder and not jointly in the name of the father of the contesting defendants by Deed of Sale of December 1926 when there was no bar in law to purchase the suit property in the name of the minor father of the contesting Defendants 1,2 and 5 in the Deed of Sale of December 1926? 2(b) Whether Benami Transaction Prohibition Act 1988 which came in force on 5th September 1988 and provisions of Section 3,5 and 8 thereof on 9.5.1988 was applicable to the suit property bearing s...
The Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Shanta and ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-21-2015
1. This appeal by the Insurance Company questions legality and validity of the impugned Judgment and Award passed in Claim Petition No.1054 of 1999 by the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur on 25.10.2005 thereby allowing the Claim Petition with costs and directing respondent nos. 1 and 2 therein to pay Rs.9,15,000/- to the petitioners and respondent nos. 4 and 7 jointly and severally with future interest @ 7.5 % p.a. from the date of petition till realisation excluding future interest from 4.10.2000 to 7.7.2003. 2. Brief facts are that, on 17.7.1999 deceased Khushal was driving Hero Honda Motor Cycle bearing registration No.MH31 B-7888 from Borgaon to Karanja. At about 6.00 p.m. Near Borgaon Fata, truck bearing registration No.MP-32/3153 owned by respondent no.4 and insured with the appellant coming from opposite direction in high speed gave dash to the motor cycle of deceased and ran over him. Victim Khushal suffered fatal injuries and died on the spot. It is contended tha...
Enercon GmbH, Germany Vs. Wind World (India) Limited, Daman and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-20-2015
Introduction 1. These two Company appeals arise from the common order passed by the Company Law Board, Mumbai bench, Mumbai dated 14 December 2012. The parties and the issues raised in these two appeals are interlinked. The appeals were argued and heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. Both the Company Appeals are filed by Enercon GmbH. In Company Appeal No.42 of 2013 “ Enercon GmbH has challenged the order passed by the Company Law Board in Company Petition No.83 of 2011 (originally numbered as Company Petition No.74 of 2008) filed by Mr.Yogesh Mehra and others. In Company Appeal No.43 of 2013 Enercon GmbH has challenged the order passed by the Company Law Board in Company Petition No.82 of 2011 (originally numbered as Company Petition No.121 of 2007) filed by Enercon GmbH. 3. The Company in respect of which the proceedings have arisen is M/s Enercon (India) Limited, now named Wind World (India) Ltd. Enercon GmbH holds 56% equity shares in Enercon I...
The Manager, HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kalpana and Othe ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-20-2015
1. Heard. 2. Admit . 3. Mr.Ashish Kadukar, learned Counsel waives service on behalf of Respondent No.1 and Mr.Rajnish Vyas, learned Counsel waives service on behalf of Respondent Nos.5 and 6. 4. This appeal by the Insurance Company questions legality and validity of the impugned order below Exh.2 in M.A.C.P. No.149 of 2011 whereby the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandrapur by order dt.8.7.2014 allowed the application for interim compensation under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 directing non-applicant nos. 1 to 3 jointly and severally to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- with interest @ 9 % p.a. from 15.9.2012 till realisation of the amount. On realisation of entire amount, the amount of Rs.10,000/- each was directed to be invested in the name of the minor claimants in fixed deposit in any nationalised bank till they attain the age of majority and balance amount was directed to be paid to the claimant no.1 Kalpana. 5. Brief facts are that, on 6.3.2011, Shahaji...
Yogesh Pandharinath Dalvi and Another Vs. The State of Maharashtra, Th ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Aug-20-2015
Oral Judgment:(R.M.Borde, J.) 1. Heard. Rule. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal at admission stage. 2. The petitioner no.1 Yogesh Pandharinath Dalvi in Writ Petition No.8640/2015 is Sarpanch of village Panchayat, Jogeshwari, taluka Gangapur, district Aurangabad. According to the petitioners, the elections to the Village Panchayat were held during the earlier tenure and the results were declared on 6.9.2010. The first meeting of the Village Panchayat was conducted on 14.9.2010. The elections of the Village Panchayat for the term between the year 2015 and 2020 are held and the results are declared on 6.8.2015. The Collector has issued a notice for holding elections to the posts of Sarpanch and Upa Sarpanch of the newly elected body of the Panchayat on 21.8.2015. The petitioners are, thus, objecting to the holding of elections for the posts of Sarpanch and Upa Sarpanch for the tenure between the years 2015 and 2020 on 21.8...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »