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.
Nasreen Shaikh Anwar and Another Vs. State of Goa, Through the P.I.
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: May-03-2016
1. Both these Revision applications arise out of the order dated 23/7/2005 passed by the learned Children's Court, Panaji in Special Case No.42/2013. They involve common and connected questions of law and facts, as such, these criminal revisions applications are been disposed of finally by common judgment. 2. The brief facts are that the original complainant, Mrs. Aysha Rayhan is the daughter of the petitioner Mrs. Nasreen Shaikh (Accused no.1) and the sister of Mr. Tabrez Anwar (Accused no.2). There appears to be a dispute between the complainant on one hand and the petitioners/accused on the other, regarding the residential house. The incident in question has occurred on 29/1/2013, at about 11.30 a.m. at the house of the complainant. As per the complaint lodged, it was claimed by the complainant that his brother Tabrez Anwar had sent three labourers to her house. It was claimed that the accused no.1 hit 9 years old son of the complainant, by name Arman Rehan with a slap on his ear an...
Ganesh Balasaheb Suryavanshi Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-2016
P.C. Heard. This is an application under section 389 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking suspension of substantive sentence. Applicant herein is convicted for offence punishable under section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs.3,000/- in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month by Special Judge, Pune in Special Case No.57 of 2015 vide Judgment and Order dated 12/04/2016. 2. Learned Special Judge has recorded the substantive evidence of the victim who was declared hostile by the prosecution. Victim has deposed before the court that since childhood she was acquainted with the applicant and there was a love affair between them. That they had physical relationship. She conceived pregnancy and her mother realized the same. She was taken to Sasoon General Hospital on 18/10/2014 where she delivered the male child. She has been declared hostile. She has categorically depos...
Rama Nagu Gayakwad (Died) Through Lrs. and Another Vs. State of Mahara ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: May-02-2016
Oral Judgment: 1. Being aggrieved by the Judgment and Award passed by the Joint District Judge, Beed dated 28.2.1995 in LAR No.516/1989 alongwith connected LARs, the original claimants in LAR No.1151/1989 have preferred this appeal. 2.Brief facts, giving rise to the present appeal, are as under :- The Government has acquired the land situated at village Ukanda for the purpose of construction of Percolation Tank at village Ukanda. The SLAO after holding the necessary inquiry into this acquisition proceeding fixed the market value of the land acquired @ Rs.86/- per Aar for jirayat land and Rs.96/- per Aar for the Bagayat lands. The Special Land Acquisition Officer had treated all the lands as Jirayat. Being aggrieved by the same, the present appellants/original claimants alongwith the other claimants preferred separate reference petitions claiming the market value of the acquired land @ Rs.1,000/- per Aar by treating the land as Bagayat lands. The learned Jt. District Judge, Beed by its ...
Gangadhar Nanaji Milmile and Others 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 all...
Suman Namdeo Barde Vs. Raosaheb Vasantrao Jadhav and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-2016
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule, considering the challenge raised and the nature of the directions to be issued made returnable forthwith and heard. 2. The writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is invoked against the order dated 03.03.2016 passed by the Learned President of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, by which order, the Appeal filed by the Respondents herein being TRI/APL/NSK/138 of 2015 came to be allowed and resultantly, the order dated 14.07.2015 passed by the Tahsildar, Chandwad, in proceeding numbered as Adiwasi Case No.1 of 2015 came to be set aside. 3. It is not necessary to burden this order with unnecessary details having regard to the nature of the final directions to be issued. The Petitioner herein is a tribal and it is her allegation that a Sale Deed dated 28.12.2007 was got executed from her by the Respondents in respect of land bearing Gat No.85A/2 admeasuring 1 Hector and 40 Ares. The Petitioner therefore filed an application for r...
United India Insurance Co. Vs. Khudbuddin and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: May-02-2016
1. Heard. Since the issue involved in all these appeals is common, all these appeals are being decided by this common reasoning. 2. An accident had happened on 17.4.1995 having involvement of luxury bus bearing registration No.MH-20-F-9991 and a truck bearing registration No.MWE-1561. The persons, who were injured in the said accident and the legal heirs of deceased persons, who suffered death in the said accident, filed Motor Accident Claim Petitions before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, at Latur (for short, the Tribunal). Two Claim Petitions bearing MACP No.362/1995 and 220/1995 were filed in the year 1995; whereas three claim petitions were filed in the year 1996. MACP No.362/1995 wad decided on 21.2.1998; whereas the other four claim petitions came to be decided on 22.6.2000. MACP No.362/1995 was decided by the then Ex-officio Member of the Tribunal viz. Shri V.R.Kingaonkar; whereas MACP Nos.60/1996; 79/1996; 220/1995 and 187/1996 were decided on one and the same day, i.e. 22....
Asha Pralhad Karle and Others Vs. Sarpanch, Grampanchayat Valan, Taluk ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: May-02-2016
1. Being aggrieved by the Judgment and Order dated 6.1.2014 in Application (WC) No.64 of 2009, the original claimants have preferred this appeal. 2. Brief facts, giving rise to the present appeal, are as follows :- a] On 17.2.2009 at about as per directions given by the Respondents, late Pralhad Karle was doing a work of replacing electric bulb by climbing on electric pole of street light of Gram Panchayat. He was doing said work at about 04.30 p.m and while doing that work, he had fallen on the ground. In consequence of which, he had sustained grievous injuries. He was immediately shifted to hospital, where he succumbed to the injuries on 26.02.2009 while under treatment. The legal representatives of deceased Pralhad preferred an application under the Workmen's Compensation Act,1923 bearing Application (WC) No.64/2009 for grant of compensation. Deceased Pralhad was serving as a peon on monthly salary of Rs.2,400/-. His death occurred out of and during the course of his employment. b] ...
Forum for Fairness in Education an NGO, through its Authorized Person, ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-2016
A.S. Oka, J. 1. The submissions were heard on the last date. We will have to make a brief reference to the controversy in this Public Interest Litigation. Essentially, this PIL has been filed by the Petitioner inviting attention of the Court to the fact that the provisions of the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 (for short the said Act ) are not being implemented in its true letter and spirit in the State of Maharashtra. The first contention is about failure of the State Government to constitute a State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (for short State Commission ) in accordance with Section 17 of the said Act. The second contention is that there is a noncompliance with the provisions of the Subsection (1) of Section 4 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 ( for short the said Act of 2005 ) by the State Commission as well as the National Commission established under the said Act. The third point which is canvassed by the learned counsel appearing for the Pe...
Siddheshwar Shikshan Sanstha Dongarsoni and Others Vs. The State of Ma ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-02-2016
1. Rule. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents waive service. The facts in the aforesaid three writ petitions being identical and being inter-connected, were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order. 2. By Writ Petition No.4470 of 2015, the petitioner no.1-Management which runs the petitioner no.2-School has impugned the order dated 23rd February 2015 passed by the respondent no.3-the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Sangli thereby vacating the stay granted to the individual approval to the so-called appointments of the respondent nos.4, 5, 6 and 8 and approval to the promotion of the respondent no.7 and continuing the order of their approvals and seeks a writ of mandamus to cancel and/or withdraw his orders dated 15th September 2012 and 15th October 2012 by which the respondent no.1 granted the individual approval to the appointments of the respondent nos.4, 5, 6 and 8 and approval to the promotion of the respondent no.7. 3. By Writ Petition No....
Abdul Mannan Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: May-02-2016
V.K. Jadhav, J. 1. By consent of the parties, heard finally at admission stage. 2. By way of this Writ Petition, petitioner is challenging the correctness and legality of the judgment and order dated 27.11.2015 passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai, Bench at Aurangabad in Original Application No.75 of 2005, whereby the Original Application filed by the petitioner came to be rejected. 3. Brief facts, giving rise to the present writ petition, are as follows: a) The petitioner, way back in the year 1968, joined his services as a Range Forest Officer at Divisional Forest Office, Thane Circle, and came to be appointed at Mandvi Range, Vasai, District Thane. On 09.07.1990, when he was serving at Deulgaon Raja, District Buldhana, he was served with a suspension order passed by respondent No.2 under Rule 4(1) of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1979. On or about 30.12.1990, respondent No.2 had initiated departmental enquiry against the petitione...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »