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.
Sahebrao Rangrao Bawane and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-19-2016
V.M. Deshpande, J. 1. Both the appellants have been convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Achalpur vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.08.2014 in Sessions Trial No.92/2013 for an offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and the sentence imposed upon them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- by each of them and in default it is directed that they shall suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month. 2. The prosecution case is as under: Oral report is lodged by Purushottam Wasudeo Mesare (PW2). The oral report is at Exh.-22. The oral report was taken by Dnyandeo Chaudhari (PW8), who was attached to Police Station, Paratwada as API. On the basis of the said report dated 12.05.2013, Dnyandeo Chaudhari registered a crime against the accused persons. The printed FIR is at Exh.-23. The crime was registered for an offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the IPC vide Crime No.11...
Syed Asad Vs. The State of Maharashtra through Secretary Education Dep ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-19-2016
S.S. Shinde, J. 1. Heard. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, and heard finally with the consent of the parties. 3. The background facts leading for filing the Writ Petition are as under: It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner filed Writ Petition No.6236/2013 (Syed Asad s/o. Syed Yusuf Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others), seeking directions to the respondent herein to appoint him on compassionate ground in the place of his father, who died during the course of employment with respondent no.8 College. The said Writ Petition was disposed of by the High Court, thereby giving directions to the respondent management to appoint the petitioner in class-IV category on compassionate ground in the light of the scheme of the Department of Education dated 31.12.2002 and also in view of the directives issued by the Joint Director. Accordingly, the petitioner was appointed in Class-IV category on compassionate ground on 18.02.2014. The petitioner s proposal seeking approval t...
Dinkar Hanumant Dokhe Vs. Saibaba Sansthan Vishwastha Vyavastha
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-19-2016
Sangitrao S. Patil, J. 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the petition is heard finally. 2. The petitioner, who was serving as a Ward-Boy with the respondent since 1978, has been suspended on 9th July, 2014 on the allegations of committing theft of cash amount while counting the donations received by the respondent. An FIR No. I-113/2014 came to be registered against the petitioner in Shirdi Police Station for the offence punishable under section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. After investigation, a criminal case bearing Regular Criminal Case (R.C.C.) No. 225 of 2014 has been instituted against the petitioner in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class at Rahata for the said offence. The said case is still pending. 3. The respondent initiated a regular disciplinary enquiry against the petitioner and served chargesheet on him on 14th July, 2014. The said enquiry is being conducted by the Enquiry Officer, namely, Advoc...
Ajit Murur and Others Vs. Commissioner, State Common Entrance Test Cel ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-2016
Oral Judgment: 1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are seeking the following reliefs:- "a. That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other order or direction in the nature of a Writ of Certiorari and call for all the records and documents in relation to the Impugned Communication dated 10th June, 2016 ("Exhibit C") hereto from the Respondents and upon perusal thereof, be pleased to quash and set aside the Impugned Communication dated 10th June, 2016 to the extent of Deviation Nos.1 and 2 as stated in paragraphs 10(a) and 10(b) hereinabove; b. That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other order or direction in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to stay the operation and execution of the Impugned Communication dated 10th June, 2016 ("Exhibit C") and to desist from taking any action in furtherance thereof; c. That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ...
Mohammad Munaf Mohammad Hanif Bedre and Others Vs. State of Maharashtr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-2016
Dr. Shalini PhansalkarJoshi, J. 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned counsel for both the parties. 2. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek to challenge legality, validity and propriety of the Judgment and Order dated 3rd May, 2016 passed by respondent No.2Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Pune, invalidating the caste certificate of the petitioners as belonging to "Koya" a Scheduled Tribe, with further directions to respondent No.2 to issue the certificates of validity in respect of the caste certificates granted to them by the Competent Authority. 3. Relevant facts of the petition are to the effect that, petitioner Nos.1 to 3 are real brothers, inter se, and petitioner No.4 is their sister. According to them, they belong to the "Koya Tribe", which is notified as Scheduled Tribe under the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Amendment) Act, 1976 and they are professing Islam religion. T...
The Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax, VAT-III Vs. Kayani Bakery, P ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-2016
Dr. Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi, J.] 1. These three Notices of Motion are preferred by the Revenue seeking condonation of delay in preferring appeals under Section 27 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002, against the Judgment and Order of the First Bench of Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal, Mumbai. As they raise the common questions of law and facts, they are being decided by this common order. 2. The first and second Notices of Motion, being Notice of Motion Nos.891 of 2016 and 910 of 2016, are directed against the order dated 27th March 2014 passed by the First Bench of the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal, Mumbai in VAT Second Appeal Nos.119 and 120 of 2013 and the delay in preferring Appeals against those orders is of 548 days. The third Notice of Motion No.1007 of 2016 is directed against the order dated 19th June 2009, also passed by the First Bench of the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal, Mumbai. It is in VAT Appeal No.9 of 2007 and the delay in this case is of about 2288 days. 3...
Jayshri Ginning and Spinning (P) Ltd., (Now known as Jayshri Internati ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-2016
Anoop V. Mohta, J. 1. This Appeal is filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, Arbitration Act, 1996) by the Original Petitioner as the Notice of Motion for condonation of delay of 25 days in filing Section 34 Arbitration Petition was dismissed by the learned Judge on 27 April 2015, thereby the Arbitration Petition also stands rejected. Hence, the Appeal. 2. The basic events are as under: The business affairs of the Petitioner Company were wholely, solely and independently looked after by one Shri Parbatbhai B. Hirpara. The other directors of the company were not involved in the running of the business of the company and they were all engaged in their own independent businesses. 3. On 9 August 2010, alleged Contract was made between the Petitioner and the Respondent for sale of 600 Cotton Bales delivery of which was to be made between 1.12.2010 to 15.12.2010 i.e. forward contract (on the basis that the cotton will grown in and around Jetpur area, ...
Sachin Vs. The State of Maharashtra Through Principal Secretary Rural ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Jul-19-2016
S.S. Shinde, J. 1. This Writ Petition is filed with the following prayers: C) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or directions and quash and set aside the final selection list dated 10/12/2015 (Exh.D) published by the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 i.e. District Selection Committee, Jalna for the post of Junior Assistant (Clerk), reserved for handicapped (Deaf and Dumb) category. CA) This Hon'ble court may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction and quash and set aside the appointment order dated 21/01/2016 issued by respondent Nos. 2 to 4 in favour of respondent No.5 i.e. Mr. Datta S/o Shivajirao Pawar and direct the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 to issue appointment order for the post of Junior Assistant (Clerk) from reserved category for handicapped (Dumb and Deaf) person in favour of petitioner, within stipulated period. 2. The relevant facts for filing this Writ Petition are as under: The petitioner belongs to N.T.D. category and handicapped (dea...
Pradeep Sakharam Mayekar Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-2016
G.S. Kulkarni, J. 1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner who is working in the Secretariat of the Maharashtra Legislative Council on the post of Section Officer has interalia prayed for a direction that the record and proceedings of the Promotional Committee of the Maharashtra Legislative Council whereby a decision to grant promotion to Respondent Nos.4 and 5 vide order dated 28 February 2012 to the post of Under Secretary , be called for and same be quashed and set aside and for the further relief that the Respondents be directed to grant promotion to the Petitioner prior to Respondent Nos.4 and 5 assuming charge on their promotional post. 2. In nutshell, the facts are: By an order dated 1 November 1990 the Petitioner under a direct selection was appointed on the post of Assistant. Thereafter, the Petitioner was promoted to the post of Section Officer on 25 June 2007. While in service the Petitioner undertook the Bachelor of General Law cour...
United Church of Northern India Trust Association, through its lawful ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Jul-19-2016
1. Rule. Heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner original plaintiff is aggrieved by the order dated 10-1-2013 passed in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No.54/2012 whereby the said appeal preferred by the respondent no.1 defendant no.1 under provisions of order XLIII Rule 1(f) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ( for short, the Code) has been allowed and the suit filed by the petitioner has been dismissed under provisions of Order XI Rule 21 of the Code. 3. The facts relevant for adjudication of the challenge raised in the writ petition are that the petitioner is an Association of Trusts of Northern India constituted under the Companies Act, 1913. It is also registered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950. The suit property consisting of a structure on the land owned by the petitioner was in occupation of the respondents. According to the petitioner, the said respondents had no right to continue in occupation of th...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »