Mumbai Court February 2016 Judgments
Milind and Others Vs. Pramod
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-29-2016
1. Admit. Heard finally by consent of the learned Advocates appearing for the parties. 2. The respondent/plaintiff-Pramod s/o Deshraj Budhraja has filed Summary Civil Suit No.108 of 2015 under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure on 10-8-2015 for a decree in the sum of Rs.3,51,26,250/- along with future interest at 21% per annum compounded quarterly from the date of filing of the suit till its payment, against the appellant-defendants, alleging that the defendants had issued four cheques dated 25-2-2015, 25-3-2015, 25-4-2015 and 25-5-2015 for an amount of Rs.1,00,00,000/- each in favour of the plaintiff to discharge their liability, and all the four cheques were dishonoured due to insufficient funds. The first cheque dated 25-2-2015 was presented on 26-2-2015, and upon its dishonour, it was returned to the defendant No.1, who made the payment of Rs.70,00,000/- and assured to make the balance payment of Rs.30,00,000/-, which he has failed to make. The other three cheques were dis...
Tag this Judgment!S.A. Sinha Metropolitan Magistrate Vs. Dr. Leo Rebello
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-29-2016
V.M. Kanade, J. 1. This is a case where the respondent/contemnor who is an accused charged for offences punishable under sections 354, 337, 509, 323, 504 I.P.C. has persistently harassed, intimidated, threatened the learned Metropolitan Magistrate ( MM ) before whom his case was pending trial and as a result the learned MM has made a reference under Section 15(2) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act ). 2. Reference under section 15(2) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 has been made by Smt.S.A.Sinha, Metropolitan Magistrate, 17th Court, Borivali, Mumbai vide letter bearing Confi.Outward No.32 of 2014 dated 14.10.2014 addressed to the Registrar (Judicial-I), High Court, Bombay. 3. It is stated in the said order that she was Metropolitan Magistrate, 17th Court, Borivali, Mumbai and she had taken charge of that Court on 06.06.2011. She has stated that two Criminal Cases; one bearing C.C. No.3869/PS/2008 (C.R. No.281/99) of Samtanagar Police Station...
Tag this Judgment!Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Another Vs. Shri Pandurang ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-29-2016
Oral Judgment: (A.S. Oka, J.) 1. The submissions of the learned counsel for the parties were heard on the last date. The Civil Application No.221 of 2013 made in a disposed of PIL by the Mumbai Municipal Corporation discloses shocking state of affairs in Mumbai. The city of Mumbai is stated to be the commercial capital of India. Now, it is sought to be made a Smart City. But, admittedly quantity of 60% to 70 % of the municipal solid waste generated every day in Mumbai is being illegally dumped in the city itself by the Mumbai Municipal Corporation. An affidavit was filed by the Municipal Commissioner of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation way back on 2nd March 2015 in which it is accepted that as of that date, there was a daily generation of 9400 Metric Ton (for short MT ) municipal solid waste and approximately 1000 MT of debris of buildings and that the generation of solid waste is likely touch 10,000 to 11,500 MT per day. The same affidavit and subsequent affidavits record the admitted...
Tag this Judgment!Arun Barikrao Chavan Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-29-2016
1. None appears for the appellant and hence, this Court had requested Advocate Shri Ujwal R. Agandsurve to espouse the cause of the appellant. He has graciously accepted the request made by the Court. Heard the learned Advocate appointed for the appellant and the learned APP for State. 2. The appellant herein is convicted for offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for 3 years and to pay fine of Rs.500/- I. d. to suffer R.I. for 2 months. He is also convicted for offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay fine of Rs.500/- I. d. to suffer further R.I. for one month by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik in Sessions Case No.38 of 1996 vide Judgment and Order dated 12th April, 1996. Hence, this appeal. 3. Such of the facts necessary for the decision of this appeal are as follows : The appellant herein was married to Tulsa/Kamal in the year 1994. On 20/2/1995 the...
Tag this Judgment!Madhukar Sikshan Prasarak Mandal Khinala and Another Vs. The State of ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Feb-29-2016
P.R. Bora, J. 1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal at admission stage. 2. The petitioners have filed the present petition for quashment of orders dated 7.7.2012; 6.9.2014 and 12.9.2014. Petitioner No.1 is a registered trust duly registered under the provisions of Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. Petitioner No.2 is a school run by petitioner No.1 trust. 3. Petitioner No.1 had started petitioner No.2 school in the year 1992 and successfully run the same till the year 2012. The school was duly approved by the Government and was also receiving grant-in-aid from the Government. In the year 1999, a license was received to run the said school and the said license was regularly renewed by the respondents till 31st March, 2011. The license issued by Respondent No.3 to run the petitioner no.2 school has been cancelled by Respondent No.3 vide order dated 7.7.2012. Before passing the aforesai...
Tag this Judgment!Larsen and Toubro Limited Vs. Allahabad Bank and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-29-2016
1. At the behest of the Plaintiff Larsen and Toubro Limited ( L and T), Defendant No. 1 -- Allahabad Bank has issued a Performance Bank Guarantee ( PBG ) No. 00182131PG000017 on 11th July, 2013 for Rs. 98,35,00,000/- in favour of Defendant No.2 -- GVK Projects and Technical Services Limited ( GVK Projects ) which Guarantee is annexed and marked as Exhibit-A to the Plaint. GVK Projects by its letter dated 13th January, 2016 addressed to the Allahabad Bank invoked the said Guarantee dated 11th July, 2013. Pursuant thereto, the above Suit is filed by L and T for a declaration that the invocation of the said PBG by GVK Projects is per se illegal, unjustified, contrary to the contract, mala fide, fraudulent and therefore vitiated and not binding on L and T as also on Allahabad Bank, and that GVK Projects and Defendant No. 3 GVK Ratle Hydro Electric Projects Pvt. Ltd. ( GVK Ratle ) are not entitled to receive any amounts there-under from Allahabad Bank. L and T has also prayed for a permanen...
Tag this Judgment!Shailesh Manohar Patil Others Vs. Thane Municipal Corporation and Othe ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
Anoop V. Mohta, J. 1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. 2. Since the issues involved in all these matters are common, the same are heard and therefore disposed of by this common judgment, accordingly. 3. The Petitioners have challenged separately, respective but similar order dated 3 November 2015, whereby they have been declared deemed disqualified councillor of Thane Municipal Corporation (The Corporation). The provisions of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 (for short, MMC Act ) referring to Sections 10 (1D), 11, and 12 have been invoked. 4. Sections 10 (1D), 11 and 12 of the MMC Act read thus: 10. Disqualification for being a councillor, (1) Subject to the provisions of Sections 13 and 404, a person shall be disqualified for being elected and for being a councillor, if such person ............ (1D) A Councillor shall be disqualified for being a Councillor, if such Councillor has constructed or constructs by himself, his spouse or is depe...
Tag this Judgment!Oneil Sandeep Bhapkar Vs. Savitribai Phule Pune University and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
P.C. 1. By this Petition, which has been urgently circulated for the last date of submission of examination forms falls on 28th February 2016, the Petitioner prays that a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction in nature thereof be issued to the Respondents to forthwith declare the result of 7th semester, 4th year B.S.L. LL.B. course and also that a communication, at page 28, dated 9th February 2016 be withdrawn. 2. The facts would have to be set out in some details to appreciate the argument of a failed student. 3. The Petitioner was admitted in the Respondent No.3-College for a five year law degree course in the year 2011-2012. It is undisputed that the degree is awarded by the Respondent No.1-University and the course, as also the affiliation of Respondent No.3-College, is to the Respondent No.1 University. 4. Thereafter the Petitioner cleared the first two years of the course and took admission in the 3rd year of the said law course in the academic year 2013-2014. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Industrial Development Bank of India Ltd. Vs. Parmeshwari Fabrics Priv ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
1. Pursuant to a Notification dated 30.9.2006 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs (Banking Division) under Section 45(7) of the Banking Regulations Act 1949, erstwhile United Western Bank (UWB) amalgamated with the appellant. The scheme of amalgamation came into effect on 3.10.2006. From the prescribed date of the scheme, the properties and assets of the erstwhile UWB got transfered to and became the properties and assets of the appellant. On the same footing, all liabilities, duties and obligations of erstwhile UWB became the liabilities, duties and obligations of the appellant. As per paragraph 6(5) of the scheme of amalgamation, the appellant in partial satisfaction of the claim in respect of the interest in the shares of UWB, was to pay upfront a sum of Rs.28/- in cash in respect of each fully paid up share of erstwhile UWB to the members of the erstwhile UWB. During the course of doing due diligence after the prescribed date, it i...
Tag this Judgment!Manicabai N. Tendulkar Vs. The Chief Officer, Mapusa Municipal Council
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
1. Heard Mr. V. P. Thali, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant and Mr. S. D. Padiyar, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent. 2. Admit. 3. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties. 4. Mr. S. D. Padiyar learned Counsel waives notice on behalf of the respondent. 5. This appeal challenges the order dated 9.10.2015 passed under Order 39 of the CPC by the District Judge-II at Mapusa in Regular Civil Appeal No. 127/2014. 6. Brief facts of the may be stated as follows:- In the year 1904, an open land admeasuring 21.96 square metres was allotted to the father of the Shri Namdev F. Tendulkar, namely Shri Fondu Rahgunath Tendulkar by the then local body i.e. Camara Municipal de Bardez under Portuguese Decree No. 43525. Shri Fondu R. Tendulkar was running a hair cutting saloon during his lifetime and regularly paying ground rent to the municipalities. After the death of Fondu Tendulkar in the year 1953, suit shop was run by his el...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »