Mumbai Court February 2016 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.
JHS Svendgaard Laboratories Ltd. Vs. Gillettee India Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-15-2016
Oral Judgment: (Anoop V. Mohta, J.) 1. Rule. Returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. 2. The Appellant under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short the 'Act') has challenged the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 14 December 2015 on an application filed by the Petitioners-Respondents under section 9 of the Act whereby reliefs in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (d) are granted. The operative part of the order is reproduced herewith below: As regards the absence of the arbitration clause in the Asset Agreement, perusal of the agreement shows that the main agreement i.e.Toothpaste Agreement is specifically made to be a part of the Asset Agreement. Therefore, on a prima facie view, the arbitration clause in the Toothpaste Agreement can be read into the Asset Agreement. Hence, the ad interim order in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (d). The respondent shall handover the assets specified at Exhibit 'N' within a period of six weeks fr...
Anil Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Feb-15-2016
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard. 2. The appellant was convicted by learned Ist Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Aurangabad vide judgment and order dated 15th June, 2002 in Sessions Case No.109 of 1999 for the offence punishable under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code. He was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-. Hence, the present appeal. 3. The prosecution case, in short, is as under:- PW 2 - Kantabai, complainant was earlier married to one Kisan Kaduba Gadkar. She had three issues from the said marriage. However, in the meantime, she had developed love affair with the present appellant - Anil Shejul. Therefore, her husband Kisan had deserted her in the year 1980. Thereafter, she started residing with the appellant and accepted him as husband. They resided together for about 10 years and cohabited happily. The appellant already had his first wife namely, Meerabai and she was residing at a different place in the city of Aurangabad itself. Said Meerab...
MIRC Electronics Ltd. Vs. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-15-2016
Oral Judgment: 1. The Applicant M/s. MIRC Electronics Ltd. has filed the above Application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 ( the Act ) for appointment of a sole arbitrator under the provisions of the Act. 2. The Respondent -- The Oriental Insurance Company Limited has opposed the Application on the ground that an amount of Rs. 39.78 crores has been paid by the Respondent to the Applicant towards full and final settlement of their claim, for which the Applicant has signed a discharge voucher. 3. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this Application are as under: 3.1 The Applicant is in the business of manufacturing electronic products. The Applicant's plant/factory is situated at Unit No.2, Village Mundyaki, NH-58, Delhi-Roorkee Highway, Dist. Haridwar, Roorkee, Uttarakhand (the said premises ). The Applicant had taken two Standard Fire and Special Perils Policies from the Respondent, being Stock Policy bearing No. 131201/11/2012/209 and A...
Chandrakant Desai Vs. State of Goa, through Maria R.E.D'souza and Anot ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-15-2016
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard. Admit. Heard finally by consent. 2. Learned counsel for the revision applicant has assailed the impugned judgment and order on two grounds (a) the investigation could not have been carried out without sanction of the concerned magistrate as the offence punishable under section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act is non cognizable and (b) secondly, no reliance could have been placed upon the breathe test report, the same being not admissible in evidence. 3. Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the application submitting that both these challenges have been extensively dealt with by the learned Magistrate in the impugned order and neither any illegality and/or incorrectness and/or impropriety could be found in impugned order and therefore, this is not a fit case for interfering with the impugned judgment and order. 4. On going through the impugned judgment and order, I find substance in the argument of the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the St...
Prabhakar Vs. Additional District Magistrate Collectorate Premises, Na ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-12-2016
P.C. 1. By this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the order of the Additional District Magistrate, Nagpur dated 9-10-2015 under Section 14 of the Secularization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest act, 2002 (herein after referred to as the 'Act' for the sake of brevity) permitting the respondent No.2 Bank to secure the actual possession of the property from the petitioner. 2. The petitioner is one of the co-borrowers who had obtained cash credit facility from the respondent No.2 Bank to the extent of Rs.2,75,000/-. Since the petitioner defaulted in repaying the loan amount, the respondent No.2 Bank issued a notice under Section 13(2) of the Act on 17-9-2009. The symbolic possession of the property that was mortgaged by a registered mortgage deed by the petitioner with the respondent No.2 Bank was secured by the Bank immediately thereafter, in terms of the provisions of Section 13(4) of the Act. After securing the symbolic possession, the B...
Asha Vs. T.S.K. Reddy and Another
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-12-2016
Oral Judgment: 1. The question that arises for consideration in this contempt petition filed under Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (for short, the Act of 1971) is whether the Commissioner while considering a complaint filed under Section 62 of The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities and Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (for short, the Act of 1995) is a court for the purposes of Section 10 of the Act of 1971. 2. The petitioner was appointed as a Forest Guard in the Forest Department of the State of Maharashtra. Her appointment was on a post reserved for handicapped persons. The petitioner sought promotion on the post of Forester and on said claim not being accepted, she filed a complaint under Sections 62 and 63 of the Act of 1995 before the Commissioner. By order dated 2-7-2015, the Commissioner partly allowed the complaint and directed the Chief Conservator of Forest to examine the case of the petitioner and considered her claim for prom...
Rohidas Harischandra N. Shirodkar (since deceased) Thru LRs. Vs. Devra ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Feb-12-2016
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Mr. A.D. Bhobe, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. S.D. Lotlikar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent no.1. 2. The above appeal challenges the judgment and decree dated 30.09.2008 passed in Civil Suit No.23/2006 whereby the suit filed by the respondent no.1 and the counter claim filed by the appellants came to be disposed of by decreeing the suit partly and the appellant no.1 was permanently restrained from disconnecting the electricity connection of the suit shop M/s Sagun Shet Jewellers situated in the building known as "Kamakshi Niwas" at Budhwar Peth, Upper Bazar, Ponda Goa. The appellant no.1 is also restrained from evicting the respondent no.1 from the said shop otherwise than by due process of law. The counter claim of the appellant no.1 came to be rejected. 3. Mr. A.D. Bhobe, learned counsel appearing for the appellants has assailed the impugned judgment on the ground that the learned Judge has misconstrued the agreement...
Balaji Vs. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary in the Depa ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Feb-12-2016
A.I.S. Cheema, 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 admissions stage. 2. The Petitioner claiming to be social worker, has filed this Petition seeking declaration that the construction of commercial complex, namely, Ranjeet Singh Market and Bindu Mangal Karyalaya on Survey No.1803 at Nanded admeasuring 51,312 Sq. Ft. carried out by Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 (hereafter referred as concessionaires ) is illegal and unauthorized. Petitioner wants that the Respondent Authorities should demolish the structure and the 'concession agreement' dated 30th November 2012 executed by Respondent No.4 with Concessionaires be held to be illegal and void ab initio. The Petitioner is questioning the authority of Respondent No.4 who signed the agreement as Deputy Commissioner and wants a departmental inquiry to be held against him. Petitioner has prayed that Concessionaires be black listed and th...
Vitthal Tukaram Kadam and Another Vs. The State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-12-2016
Oral Judgment: (Dr. Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi, J.) 1. The Appellants, who stand convicted by the Judgment and Order dated 31st December 2008 in Sessions Case No.7 of 2008 of Additional Sessions Judge, Karad, for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w. 34 of IPC and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default to suffer R.I. for one month and for the offence punishable under Section 323 r/w. 34 of IPC and sentenced to suffer S.I. for one month, by this Appeal challenge their conviction and sentence. 2. Brief facts of the Appeal can be stated as follows:- Appellant No.2 is the son of Appellant No.1. Deceased Lalasaheb was the brother of Appellant No.1. They had two other brothers by name Dattatraya and PW-4 Kundalik. Deceased Lalasaheb was given in adoption to one Yeshoda Kadam and his name was entered into the property of Yeshoda's husband Ramchandra Kadam. Appellant No.1 wanted to sell the ancestral property the agricultural land. His brothers Datt...
Prof. Dr. Balchandra Vs. Chief Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, New D ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Feb-12-2016
P.C. 1. Heard. 2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking directions to quash and set aside the notifications dt.5.3.2013 and 25.3.2013. The petitioner has also sought a Writ of Mandamus directing the Union Public Service Commission to include 'Pali Literature' as an optional subject for UPSC Main examination, 2015. 3. It is the contention of the petitioner that 'Pali' is an ancient language having a history of 2500 years. It is further submitted that 'Pali literature' is taught in more than 50 Universities and more than 100 Colleges. It is further submitted that the University Grants Commission has also provided grants for research in 'Pali Literature' to various Scholars. It is, therefore, contention of the petitioner that deletion of 'Pali Literature' from optional subjects was totally arbitrary. 4. In reply, it is the contention of the UPSC that the 'Pali' language came to be deleted as a result of recommendations of Nigavekar Committee. It is submitted that the said...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »