Mumbai Court May 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.
M/s. Pankaj Dyes and Chemicals Ltd. Vs. M/s. Taco Hendrickson Suspensi ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-2016
Oral Judgment: 1. By this appeal filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the appellant has impugned the order dated 29th June 2015 passed by the learned District Judge-6, Pune dismissing the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by the appellant herein impugning the arbitral award dated 1st October 2012 passed by the learned arbitrator directing the appellant to refund a sum of Rs.14,90,400/- after deducting the business agreement fees for the months of January and February 2009 with interest @10% p.a. commencing from the notice dated 28th May 2009 and also costs of Rs.1,00,000/- as arbitration expenses. Learned arbitrator has also rejected the counter-claim made by the appellant in toto. 2. The appellant company executed a Business Centre Agreement with respondent company on 6th May 2008 for a period of six years commencing from 15th May 2008 to 14th May 2014 in respect of the premises with terrace admeasuring ab...
Ramkrishna Uddhao Dhawas Vs. Western Coalfields Limited
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-02-2016
Common Judgment: 1. In all these appeals preferred under Section 20 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 ("said Act" for short) the challenge is to the award passed by the Special Tribunal constituted under Section 14(2) of the said Act to determine the question of enhancement of compensation as provided under Section 73 of the said Act, to the extent it refuses to grant interest as contemplated by Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, which according to the appellants is made applicable by Circular dated 12th February, 1986 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Energy, Department of Coal. In all these matters the claim is for the interest at the rate of nine per cent per annum for a initial period of one year from the date of taking possession of the land and at the rate of fifteen per cent per annum after expiry of period of one year till the amount of compensation is paid or deposited by the acquiring body. 2. The point for determination in al...
Bajaj allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Annasaheb and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: May-02-2016
1. By filing the present appeal, the appellant Insurance Company (Original respondent No.2) has questioned correctness and legality of the judgment and order passed in M.A.C.P. No.338 of 2006 on 31st of August, 2014 by the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shrirampur. 2. The present respondent nos. 1 to 3 had filed the aforesaid claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- (Rs. six lacs) on account of death of one Sandip Annasaheb Shedale who died in a motor accident happened on 10.6.2006 having involvement of an Ape Rickshaw bearing registration No.MH-17-T-5495 owned by respondent no.4 herein and isured with the present appellant. Respondent nos. 1 and 2 are the parents of deceased Sandip whereas respondent no.3 is the brother of deceased Sandip. Respondent nos. 1 to 3 are hereinafter referred to as the original claimants. 3. It was the contention of the original claimants before the Tribunal that the alleged accident happened because of rash and negligent driving of th...
Ramesh Govind Shirgonkar Vs. Narvada Prashad S. Mishra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-2016
P.C. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. By this Revision Application, defendant challenges the concurrent findings of facts recorded by both the courts below rejecting the defendant's application under Order 9 Rule 13 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for setting aside ex-parte decree dated 27.02.2013. 3. In the present proceeding, the respondent plaintiff filed RAE and R Suit No.1096/1074 of 2005 before the Small Causes Court, Mumbai against the defendant for vacant and peaceful possession of suit premises i.e. Room No.11, Narmada Krishna Bhavan (earlier known as D'Souza Chawl) Mohili Village, Sakinaka, Mumbai 400 072. The summons were duly served on the defendant on 01.12.2005. As the defendant failed and neglected to file written statement within stipulated time, the Trial Court passed no written statement order. 4. Thereafter, the defendant filed application below Exh.8 on 16.02.2008 for condonation of delay in filing the written statement. That application was rejected by...
Pune Zilla Madhyavarti Sahakari Bank Ltd. Vs. Hanuman Vividh Karykari ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-2016
1. Rule in each of these petitions. With the consent of and at the request of learned counsel for the parties, Rule is made returnable forthwith. 2. Learned counsel for the parties state and agree that common issues of law and fact arise in this batch of petitions and therefore, it would be appropriate, if this batch of petitions is disposed of by common judgment and order. For the sake of convenience, reference will be made to the facts and circumstances of Writ Petition No. 8235 of 2014. 3. In all these petitions, challenge is to the orders dated 1 August 2014 made by the Divisional Joint Registrar Co-operative Societies, Pune Division (respondent no.4) allowing the appeals instituted by respondent no.1 in each of these petitions and directing the petitioner to enroll respondent no.1, in each of these petitions, to membership of the petitioner-society with effect from 8 December 2009. The orders dated 1 August 2014 shall hereinafter be referred to as impugned orders . 4. The petition...
Kiran Chhaganlal Pawar Vs. State of Maharashtra Through Commissioner, ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: May-02-2016
S.S. Shinde, J. 1. This Petition takes exception to the impugned judgment and order dated 8th December, 2014 passed by the learned Member of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, ("MAT" for short) Mumbai, bench at Aurangabad in Original Application No.653 of 2013 and the show-cause notice dated 31st August, 2013. 2. The brief facts, as disclosed from the memo of the Petition, leading to filing of this Writ Petition are that in the year 2007, Respondent No.1 published an advertisement for filling up the post of Supervisor from the female candidates. It is submitted that the petitioner, being qualified for the said post, sent necessary application along with various documents on 15th November, 2007. On 26th July, 2009, the petitioner appeared for written examination and successfully passed the same. It is submitted that thereafter, the petitioner was called for interview on 7th August, 2009. Thereafter, on 30th October, 2009, the petitioner was informed that she was selected for the p...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›