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.
V. Krishnamurthy Vs. Union of India through the Ministry of Law and Ju ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-05-2016
Oral Judgment: (G.S. Kulkarni, J.) 1. This appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short the 'Act') is directed against the order dated 8th June 2016 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the appellant'/claimant's petition under section 34 of the Act has been dismissed upholding the award passed by the learned sole Arbitrator. 2. The appellant was the beneficiary of a three year contract of bulk advertising rights awarded by the respondents namely General Manager, Western Railways, Churchgate, Mumbai for the Andheri, Jogeshwari and Goregaon Railway Stations in Mumbai. Disputes had arisen between the parties in relation to the said contract. 3. The appellant inter alia had raised a claim for Rs.51,88,135/- along with interest against the respondents. The prayer clauses in the statement of claim, read thus: The claimant therefore prays : (a) that this Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to grant an award in terms of the Particulars of Claim annexed at Exhi...
Jagannath Vs. Satpuda Shikshan Prasarak Mandal and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-05-2016
1. The Petitioner has filed the present writ petition against the judgment and order dated 19th February, 1997, passed by the School Tribunal, Nasik in Appeal No.51 of 1995. The Petitioner had preferred the aforesaid appeal under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as "MEPS Act") challenging the order passed by the Respondent No.3 whereby the School Management had relieved the Petitioner from services on the ground that the Petitioner had resigned his post voluntarily. 2. It is the case of the Petitioner that an undated resignation letter was obtained by the Management from him under coercion. It is the further contention of the Petitioner that the said undated resignation letter was misused by the Management by putting the date on the said resignation letter as 1st March, 1995 and accepting the said resignation in the meeting alleged to be held on 29th May, 1995. It is the further contention of the Petitioner that on 31st May, 1...
Harish and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-05-2016
B.R. Gavai, J. 1. The accused/appellant being aggrieved by their conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B and Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code vide judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khamgaon dated 31.12.2013 in Sessions Trial No.39/11, have approached this Court. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is thus:- The deceased Usha was resident of Jaisalmer (Rajasthan). On 1.6.2009 she was married to accused no.1 Harish at Jaisalmer. Accused Nos.2 and 3 are parents of accused No.1. After marriage, deceased Usha started residing with the accused persons at Khamgaon. It is the prosecution case that though in the marriage, the parents of deceased Usha had given 8 tola gold, 50 total silver, clothes and other articles, the accused persons were always making a grievance that the other items like T.V., Washing Machine, etc. were not given. As such, the parents of Usha came to Khamgaon for purchasing th...
Tanaji Dharmaraj Patil and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-05-2016
Mridula Bhatkar, J. 1. Criminal Appeal No.1077 of 2007 is filed by accused Nos.1 to 3 against conviction. Criminal Appeal No.948 of 2014 is filed by State against acquittal. Criminal Revision Application No.622 of 2007 is preferred by the complainant. 2. The incident of assault has taken place on 7th July, 2004. It is the case of the prosecution that deceased Vilas Jadhav residing with his wife/complainant Vibhuti, mother Gangabai and other family members at Ramnagar Digha. He was a social worker. He was working for political party, namely, Rashtravadi Congress party. He used to take initiative to celebrate Ganesh festival and he was a President of Ganpati mandal in that area. However, in the year 2002-03, accused No.7 Vijay Chougule, who was the leader of Rashtravadi Congress party, told him not to celebrate his traditional Ganesh festival and asked him to work with accused No.2, as accused No.2 Sunil Bhosale was celebrating Ganesh festival separately in Ramnagar. However, Vilas Jadha...
Keshavrao Attamaramji Pardhi Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-05-2016
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. Heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The order dated 26-9-2014 passed by the respondent No.1 in proceedings under section 257 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (for short, the Code) is under challenge in this writ petition. 3. The relevant facts are that the petitioner No.4 is a trust registered under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950. A mutation entry dated 20-10-1993 bearing No.1753-D in respect of a property owned by the Trust came to be made in favour of one Sudamabai Sharma. The Trust challenged the said mutation entry in proceedings under section 247 of the Code. The Sub-Divisional Officer by order dated 14-8-1996 allowed the appeal and set aside the mutation entry. This order was continued by the Additional Collector on 15-7-1998. The revision application filed by said Sudamabai was not entertained by the Additional Commissioner as it was time barred. This order is dated 3-6-2004. Thereafter on 29-4-2013...
Mangesh Vs. Pradeepkumar Bansilal Mohta
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-05-2016
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. 2. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. 3. The plaintiff had filed civil suit praying for decree for eviction and for other ancillary reliefs. The civil suit was registered as small cause civil suit and tried by Civil Judge (Junior Division). The trial Court decreed the civil suit. The respondent filed appeal under Section 34 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act. The learned Principal District Judge, by the impugned judgment, has partly allowed the appeal. The learned Principal District Judge concluded that the civil suit filed by the petitioner ought to have been tried and decided by Civil Judge (Senior Division) and the Civil Judge (Junior Division) had no jurisdiction to try and decide the civil suit. The learned Principal District Judge has set aside the judgment passed by the trial Court and has remitted the matter to the trial Court with direction that it should be allotted to Civil Judge (Senior Division) for ...
Ramkishan Vs. The State of Maharashtra through its Secretary, Freedom ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-05-2016
Oral Judgment: (K.K. Sonawane, J.) 1. By this petition, the petitioner is agitating the validity, correctness and propriety of the impugned order passed by the respondent dated 4th August, 2004, rejecting the claim for grant of benefit of Samman Pension as envisaged under the Freedom Fighter Pension Scheme, 1972. 2. The factual matrix emerging from the circumstances on record in this petition is that, the petitioner had taken active participation in the Hyderabad Liberation Movement and worked as an underground freedom fighter. He had participated in the activities like campaigning against the erstwhile Nizam Government. He had collected funds for the sake of Liberation Movement. He supplied weapons to the activists of the movement. He was providing secret information about the police activities to the other workers etc. The petitioner participated in the freedom movement as underground freedom fighter. The veteran leaders Shri Vitthal Bhosale, Kondiba Surne, Nagorao Mugal, Bhujangrao ...
Balaji Motion Pictures Ltd. and Another Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-04-2016
PC:- 1. Not on board. Mentioned. Taken on board. 2. This matter was moved in urgency on Friday, 1st July 2016. On that day I passed an order setting out why I was unprepared to grant the injunction in the terms that were then placed before me. I found the reliefs to be overbroad. They were directed against to entire websites. I left it open to the Plaintiffs to renew that application after placing on an Affidavit additional and more precise information and data about offending links that point to illicit downloads of the film in question, Great Grand Masti. This film s scheduled release is 22nd July 2016. 3. Mr. Dhond renews the application today. He does so on the basis of an Additional Affidavit dated 4th July 2016 affirmed by one Mr. Ayan Roy Chowdhury, the Plaintiffs general counsel. This Affidavit sets out considerably more detail. I propose to consider some of the material of this Affidavit. To begin with, the Affidavit points out that someone named of Wasim Akram Ansari posted a...
Madankumar Kanji Joshi Vs. Kailas and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-04-2016
1. Revision is admitted. Notice after admission made returnable forthwith. Heard both sides by consent for final disposal. 2. The proceeding is filed against the judgment and decree of Rent Suit No.206/1999 which was pending in the Court of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Bhusawal and also against the judgment and decree of Rent Appeal No.60/2014 which was pending in the Court of the District Judge-1, Bhusawal. The suit was filed by the present appellant, landlord for eviction under the provisions of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947. The trial Court has dismissed the suit and the first appellate Court has confirmed the findings of the trial Court. 3. In short, the facts leading to the institution of the revision can be stated as follows :- 4. The suit property is a shop premises. It is in two pieces. One piece has the size of 10 ft x 10 ft and the other piece has the size of 3 ft x 4 ft. It is part and parcel of CTS No.1538 situated at Bhusawal and it...
M/s. Kalpana Mines and Minerals, Through its Proprietress, Kalpana Gaw ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Jul-04-2016
1. By this criminal revision Application, the petitioner takes exception to the judgment and order dated 13/1/2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge at Margao in Criminal Appeal No.60/2013, by which the appeal filed by the petitioner is dismissed and the judgment and order dated 10/4/2013 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class at Margao in Criminal Case No.209/OA/NIA/2010/D convicting the petitioner for the offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 (the Act for short) and the consequent sentence of simple imprisonment for six months and for payment of compensation of Rs.1.5 crores has been confirmed. This Court (S. B. Shukre, J) by an order dated 3/3/2016 in Criminal Misc. Application no.45/2016 had fixed this revision application for final disposal at the admission stage. In such circumstances, the revision application is taken up for final disposal by consent of the parties. 2. The facts necessary for the disposal of the application...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »