Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
..... in the humble opinion of this court, the interpretation made by hon'ble apex court can not be extended to the provisions of bombay stamp act and order 21 rule 85 of c.p. code ( bombay amendment) in view of the special provision made in this regard in maharashtra and the fact that surcharge on the stamp duty was under challenge, not ..... hon'ble apex court in aforesaid case law, said clause of schedule i of bombay stamp act needs to be treated as invalid.iii whether due to interpretation of provisions of order 21 rule 94 of code of civil procedure in relation to the provisions of indian registration at made in 2007 scw 4080 ( b. arvindkumar v. govt of india) needs ..... to be used at the time of recovering the stamp duty on sale certificate issued by civil court.iv whether in view of the interpretation made by hon'ble apex court in aforesaid two cases, bombay amendment to order 21 rule .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
..... 24.12.2009 discloses that c.r. no.i237/2006 and i128/2007 were registered against petitioner under sections 3/15 of the environment (protection) act and under sections 379 of indian penal code respectively and it is apparent that both the said offences were registered against the petitioner, with kopargaon police station, dist.ahmednagar. however, by ..... jurisdiction.15. it is further submitted by respondents that petitioner is engaged in commission of offences involving force and violence under chapter 16 and 17 of the indian penal code and petitioner's behaviour is dangerous and causing harm to the persons and property of state, and therefore, nobody will come forward to give complaint ..... against petitioner, i.e. c.r.no.i237/2006 and another c.r.no. 128/2007 under section 379 of the indian penal code and sections 3 and 15 of the environment (protection) act, 1986, pertaining to kopargaon police station, district ahmednagar and although he was acquitted from both said crimes on 31.12.2009 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
..... that the divisional commissioner had rejected the objections filed by the petitioner. the petitioner filed a revision application under section 15-a of the land acquisition act (maharashtra amendment). in stead of deciding the revision petition by the state government, the commissioner wrongly and illegally dealt with the revision petition and dismissed the same. ..... i.e. respondent no.5. the petitioner disputes that possession was taken by private negotiations or otherwise. 12) the petitioner has amended prayer clauses also. in prayer clause (c-1) the petitioner claimed a declaration that the subject acquisition be held to be mala fide and arbitrary and ..... . the petitioner contends that in respect of the award the petitioner is reserving his right to take appropriate proceedings as advised to him and the amendment was sought for limited purposes to point out as to how the amount is being wasted by public limited company to protect interests of private individual .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
..... that land subsequently.3. the impugned order is founded on premise that the only remedy available to the petitioner was under section 32 of the ht&al; act and the same is now unavailable because the application was not filed against the landlord within prescribed period of limitation. another ground in support of the impugned judgement ..... the eviction of such person.5. in the present case, the transfer in favour of respondent no.2 ananda is clearly against the provisions of the ht&al; act. no permission was obtained from the competent authority for such transfer. nor, the petitioner surrendered his rights. the petitioner was not a consenting party to the transaction ..... law, which is a social welfare legislature, it is difficult to read something to wipe out the tenancy rights which is not provided for under the ht&al; act.9. considering the foregoing reasons, it will have to be said that the impugned judgement rendered by the maharashtra revenue tribunal is unsustainable.10. in the result, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
..... objections filed in the cra are not maintainable since there is no any provision under the said act to file such cross- objections. 10) on the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents/landlord submitted his response. the amendment was carried out in the eviction petition by landlord, whereby it was submitted that, the appellant ..... for which, the said shop is required. the petitioners herein, who are the tenants, did not file any reply to the amendment and the additional grounds raised by the landlord, by way of amendment to the petition and, therefore, it needs to be presumed that the tenants have admitted the said grounds, including the ground ..... contentions of the learned counsel for the respondents in this cra that their cross- objection is maintainable in this cra is not traceable in the rent control act. however, the learned counsel for the respondents is justified in contending that oral arguments of the respondents that even the landlord requires the suit premises for .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
..... it's presentation before proper forum for trial in accordance with law, in stead of acquitting the accused for the offence under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act, 1881, and therefore, the said finding of the trial court is erroneous and unsustainable, and therefore, same deserves to be quashed and set aside.11. ..... said complaint, and therefore, acquitted the accused under section 255 (1) of the code of criminal procedure for the offence under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act, 1881.9. hence, the controversy centers around at the short question, after arriving at the conclusion that the learned judicial magistrate, first class, jalna, had no ..... arrived at the conclusion that the accused is not guilty of the charge levelled against him, and therefore, acquitted him under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act, 1881 by way of judgment and order dated 22.3.2007.5. being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and order of acquittal, the appellant (original .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
..... , learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem that we need not consider the effect of the maharashtra regional and town planning (second amendment) act, 2009. by this act, section 127 of the mrtp act has been amended and the period of six months to acquire the land after the purchase notice has been extended to twelve months.9] it would be ..... a period of six months/one year from the service of notice dated 9.2.2008. the period of six months/one year as contemplated by section 127/amended section 127 of the mrtp act, got over on 8.8.2008/8.8.2009 and in view thereof, the petitioner claim that the reservation is deemed to ..... also accordingly informed by the chief officer about this development vide letter dated 29.7.2008. the collector, jalna invoking his powers under section 52-a of the land acquisition act, forwarded the proposal to the special land acquisition officer, (krishna khore), jalna.thereafter, the special land acquisition officer (krishna khore) vide letter dated 11.8.2008 asked .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
..... order 23, rule 3 enables parties to compromise the suit and empowers the court to record and accept it. by way of an amendment, the following portion is substituted by the code of civil procedure (amendment act, 1976): " so far as it relates to the parties to the suit, whether or not the subject-matter of the agreement, ..... into by the parties and recorded by the court, this compromise or an agreement is not a void or voidable under the indian contract act and, therefore, explanation is not applicable to it. the amendment enables a compromise entered into between the parties is as per their satisfaction, free will and agreement, executable even though not covered ..... under the compromise. 13. learned counsel for the petitioner emphasised on the explanation which states that an agreement or compromise, which is void or voidable under the indian contract act, 1872 (9 of 1872), shall not be deemed to be lawful within the meaning of this rule, then this cannot be considered as a valid compromise. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
..... before the learned judicial magistrate first class. after completion of the investigation chargesheet was filed against the appellant for the offence under section 302 and 201 of indian penal code in the court of learned judicial magistrate first class, ahmednagar.4. the learned judicial magistrate first class committed case to the court of sessions ..... judge-1 and additional sessions judge ahmednagar in sessions case no.8/2008. the appellant, has been convicted for the offence punishable under section 302 of indian penal code and is sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of rs. 500/- in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for ..... in the matter of keshav v/s state of maharashtra reported in 2007(14) scale 174. the judgment pertains to interpretation of section 27 of evidence act. in the case on hand prosecution has established circumstances alleged beyond reasonable doubt. there are no material omissions or contradictions to overturn the material against the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
1) Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties.2) By the present petition, filed by the petitioner/husband (original Opponent), under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India, prayed to quash and set aside the Judgment and order dated 1.1.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions, Sangamner, in Criminal Revision Application No.7/2007, thereby granting maintenance of Rs.600/ per month to the respondent/wife herein (original applicant) from 12.7.2005.FACTUAL MATRIX :3) The petitioner herein married with the respondent on 22nd January, 1980 as per the Hindu religious rites since his earlier wife, viz. Kesarbai had expired. However, it is alleged that since the petitioner herein refused and neglected to maintain the respondent/wife, the respondent/wife filed an application, being Criminal Misc. Application No.335/2005 for grant of maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sangamner on 12.7.2005 and copy thereof. is produced at E...
Tag this Judgment!