Mumbai Court July 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.
Rohit A. Kapadia and Another Vs. Perviz J. Modi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-2016
Revati Mohite Dere, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 9th June, 2015 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Suit No. 603 of 2005 by which the appellants' suit came to be dismissed. The two short questions that essentially arise for consideration in the present appeal are:- (i) whether or not there was a concluded contract in terms of the correspondence exchanged by emails between the appellants/plaintiffs and the respondent/defendant, in particular, emails dated 19th and 20th December, 2004? (ii) whether the unsigned Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which is at Exhibit `O' to the Plaint could be said to be a concluded contract and as such valid, subsisting and binding on the respondent/defendant?; 2. For convenience, hereinafter, the appellants will be referred to as `plaintiffs' and the respondent as the `defendant'. 3. Few facts which are necessary to decide the said controversy are as under: The plaintiffs were looking to buy a flat at ...
Mohd. Sattarul Najrul Mulla Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-2016
Mridula Bhatkar, J. 1. This Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 10th February, 2009 passed by learned Sessions Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai thereby convicting the appellant/accused for the offences punishable under section 302 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default further to suffer R.I. for 15 days. 2. The case of the prosecution is as follows: Complainant Rashid Gazi Ahmed Gazi was resident of Shivajinagar, Govandi, Mumbai. He was having the business of cloth cover. His nephew Ayub and his real brother Wahid used to help him in the business. He had employed two workers, i.e., appellant/accused Mohd. Sattarul and co-accused Rana Mulla. They all used to sleep in the shop. The incident of assault has taken place on the night intervening 12th August, 2007 and 13th August, 2007. On 12th August, 2007, deceased Wahid had collected money of Rs.4,000/- from the party ...
Mukund Education Society, through its Secretary Vaishali M. Walchale a ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-14-2016
Oral Judgment: (B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.) 1. Looking to the nature of controversy and on joint request, we have heard petition finally by issuing rule and making it returnable forthwith. 2. Petitioner no.1 is an educational Society, which runs petitioner no.2 Engineering College. The petitioners have questioned notification dated 19/5/2016 issued by respondent no.1 University whereby intake capacity of petitioner no.2 has been brought down from 16 to 0 in academic year 2016-17 though affiliation has been continued. 3. We have heard Senior Adv. Manohar with Adv. Deshpande for petitioners, Adv. Kasat for respondent no.1 University and Shri Patil, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent no.3 State. Nobody has appeared for respondent no.2 All India Council for Technical Education. 4. Learned Senior Adv. Manohar has pointed out that the College has been given intake capacity initially in the year 2014-15 of 18 seats each for post graduation courses in Computer Science and Informat...
Dr. Deepak Vs. The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Minist ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-14-2016
Oral Judgment: (B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.) 1. Considering the nature of controversy, after hearing the respective counsel on 12.07.2016, we adjourned the matter to today. Today, we have heard Shri Dadhe, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Patil, learned AGP for respondent No. 1 and Shri Kukday, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 3, finally by issuing Rule and making it returnable forthwith. 2. By placing reliance upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court dated 30.11.2015 in Writ Petition No. 2871 of 2012 (Dr. Percy s/o Savakshaw Jilla vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.) delivered at Aurangabad Bench, Shri Dadhe, learned counsel submits that the petitioner, who is a leading Medical Practitioner in the city of Nagpur, dealing exclusively with Heart treatment is required to use the 2D Echo Colour Doppler Machine for treating his patients. To attend the patients, he is required to visit I.C.C.U. at Shravan Hospital, Nandanwan and Sanjivani Critical Care at Sakkardara, Nag...
Ahmedali Khan Vs. The State of Maharashtra through Vazirabad Police St ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-13-2016
1. The appellant Ahmed Ali Khan was tried along with other two accused (Mohd. Iqbal Abdul Habib accused No.2 and Shaikh Mujaid Shaikh Chand Pasha accused No.3) before 3rd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded in Sessions Case No.40/2002 for offence punishable under Sections 366-A, 354, 341, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC in brief). The other two accused came to be acquitted of all the charges while the appellant accused (hereafter referred as accused) came to be convicted for offence punishable under Sections 341 and 354 of the IPC. For offence punishable under Section 341, he was sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for one month and for offence under Section 354 of IPC, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs.5000/-, and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. The sentences were directed to run concurrently vide judgment dated 29.11.2004. Thus, this appeal. 2. The case of prose...
Hamida Mistry and Another Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-13-2016
A.S. Oka, J. (Signed Judgment pronounced by A.S. Oka, J. as per clause (iii) of Rule 296 of the Bombay High Court Original Side Rules as C.V. Bhadang, J. is sitting at Panaji) 1. By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioners have challenged the resolution dated 17th August, 2011 bearing No.470 passed by the General Body of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation. The issue in this Petition concerns Pay and Park Scheme implemented by the Mumbai Municipal Corporation (for short "the said Municipal Corporation) at various places in the city. Under Section 326A of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (for short "the said Act of 1888") the said Corporation is entitled to earmark parking spaces for vehicles in any part of the public streets or public places. A circular dated 19th August, 2002 was issued by the Municipal Corporation providing that all Assistant Commissioners should identify the locations where pay and park schemes can be implemented. The circ...
The Shambhavi Co-op. Housing Society Ltd. Vs. Shrikrishna Talak
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-13-2016
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Mr. Shirodkar, learned Counsel waives service on behalf of the respondent. Heard finally, by consent of the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner, who is the disputant before the Nominee of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, is challenging the judgment and order dated 23.11.2015, passed by the learned President, Co-operative Tribunal, Panaji, Goa in Co-operative Revision Application No. 5/2014, by which the order dated 09.06.2014, passed by the Nominee of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, allowing the application for amendment of the respondent, has been confirmed. 3. The brief facts are that the petitioner has filed the aforesaid dispute stating that the respondent is staying in a flat on the third floor of the building, bearing Flat No. B/T-1. It is contended that the respondent has constructed an illegal shed, opposite his flat on terrace 'B' on 25.05.2010 and fitted a fabricated gate, next to the second floor flat on 30.1...
Dr. Mangala Veeresh Vs. The State of Goa through the Under Secretary ( ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-13-2016
Oral Judgment: (F.M. Reis, J.) 1. Heard Shri Shivan Desai, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Ms. Asha Desai, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents no.1 and 2 and Mrs. A. Agni, learned Senior Counsel with Ms. A. Kamat, learned counsel for the respondent no.4. 2. The above petition, inter alia, takes exception to the rejection of the representation filed by the petitioner for claiming the entitlement of pensionary benefits or in the alternative to condone the break in services in the employment . 3. The brief facts of the case as under:- The petitioner made an application to the respondent no.3 in the year 1992 as a full time post of Lecturer in the subject of Zoology. By a letter dated 17th November, 1992 the respondent no.3 appointed the petitioner to the full time post of Lecturer in the subject of Zoology. It is further contended that by letter dated 20.6.1994 the respondent no.3 continued the services of the petitioner for another academic year 1994-9...
Ananta and Another Vs. The Registrar, Maharashtra Animal and Fisheries ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-13-2016
S.S. Shinde, J. 1. This Petition is filed with the following prayers: (B) By issuing writ of certiorari or any appropriate writ, order or directions in the like nature, to quash and set aside the impugned resolution No.32 and 33 of 2016 passed by the respondent University, by which it has been resoled, not to issue No Objection Certificate to the academic officer / staff of the university seeking admission to the Ph.D. course outside the respondent university for academic year 2016-2017. (C) By issuing writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ, order or directions, the respondent be directed to issue No Objection Certificate in favour of petitioners along with consequential relieving order, so also conferring the necessary consequential service benefits to the petitioners, forth with, enabling the petitioners to join and participate in the counseling, which would be held on 14/07/2016 at National Dairy Research Institute Karnal , (Haryana), and for that purpose necessary directions be i...
Mansi Mohan Chandarkar nee Rajashree Rajaram Manve Vs. Mohan Vishnu Ch ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-13-2016
C.V. Bhadang, J. (Signed judgment is pronounced by A.S. Oka, J. as per clause (i) of Rule 1 of Chapter XI of Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules as C.V. Bhadang, J. is sitting at Panaji.) 1. By this appeal the appellant/wife is challenging the judgment and order dated 23/5/2007 passed by the Family Court at Mumbai in Petition No.A-1711/2003. By the impugned judgment, the Family Court has allowed the petition filed by the respondent/husband, thereby dissolving the marriage between the parties on the ground of cruelty under section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Act for short) with some other reliefs. 2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal may be stated thus: That the parties got married on 5/12/2001 whereupon the appellant went to reside at the matrimonial house which consisted of the respondent, his parents, a married brother by name Anil, a married sister by name Akshata and an unmarried brother by name Bharat, who is since dead. The appellant sinc...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »