1. Ambubai Balraj Naral v. Sabale Waghire and Company, 12-09-2018
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 115 & Order XXI Rule 95 - Delivery of property in occupancy of judgment debtor - Auction Sale - Limitation - the applicants not having appeared before the executing Court and having filed various proceedings impuging auction sale and for seeking stay from issuance of sale confirmation certificate which proceedings were pending for last several years, cannot be allowed to raise a plea of limitation at this stage on the ground that the application was not made within one year from the date of confirmation of sale certificate.
2. Narayan Ramchandra Mante v. State of Maharashtra, 12-09-2018
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 5(1)(e) r/w 5(2) - Burden of proving an allegation lies on the person who makes such an allegation.
3. Royal Manor Co-operative) Housing Society Ltd. v. Angana Bharali Das, 12-09-2018
Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (Maharashtra) - Section 91 - The Co-operative Court or the Co-operative Appellate while exercising its powers can always give incidental directions or grant ancillary reliefs to the order that may be passed under section 91.
4. Ansar Dastgir Aitawade v. State of Maharashtra, 12-09-2018
Penal Code, 1860 - Ss. 302 r/w. 120-B, 143, 147, 148, 149, 427 - Muddemal articles were in the custody of the investigating officer for about 12 days and during the said period possibility of tampering with the muddemal articles cannot be ruled out - explicit reliance cannot be placed upon the chemical analysis report -Investigating Agency has not carried out the investigation in proper manner - motorcycle of deceased was not seized - the Qualis in which it is stated that deceased was carried to the Hospital was not seized - the clothes on the person of PW-2 Salim which were on his person when he allegedly lifted deceased to put him in the Qualis, were also not seized - there is no cogent, clinching and sufficient evidence showing the involvement of the appellants.
5. HVPM's Degree College of Physical Education v. Assistant Commissioner of Provident Fund, 11-09-2018
Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 - Section 7A, 7Q & 14B - Power to recover damages - Order of levy of damages - the order is in flagrant violation of the statutory scheme.The authority, who was irrefutably acting in quasi judicial capacity was duty bound to consider the material on record and then to pass a reasoned order spelling out the reasons for (a) concluding that imposition of damages is warranted and (b) imposition of maximum damages permissible in law. The explanation of the establishment is not even referred to much less considered. No reasons are given for imposing the maximum damages permissible. The order impugned clearly falls foul of the letter and spirit of the statutory provision.
Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 181, 193, 206, 207, 218, 406, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 465, 467 & 471 r/w. 34 - For issuing a process under these offences, it is necessary for a Magistrate to consider the allegations explaining the role played by each of the accused persons in the matter. It is also necessary for the complainant to make specific allegations against all the accused persons so that various criminal acts allegedly committed by them, come out in the open enabling the Magistrate to form an opinion as to whether these criminal acts constitute or do not constitute various ingredients of each and every offence in respect of which taking of cognizance by the Magistrate is solicited by the complainant.
6. Shrikant Rajaram Sarmokdam v. State of Maharashtra, 11-09-2018
Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 109, 119, 304, 308, 336, 337, 338, 420, 427, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 34 read with Section 120-B - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Section 13(1)(d) - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 227 - Applications for discharge - there is more than sufficient material to proceed against the Applicants to frame charge under Section 228 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Trial Court has not committed any error either in law and/or on facts, while passing the impugned Order.
7. Pramod Kumar v. Ashish, 10-09-2018
8. Pramod Kumar v. Ashish, 10-09-2018
Penal Code, 1860 - Section 464 - Forgery - Merely stating about the heading of the offence like offence of forgery, no prima facie case could be said to be made out and what is required for this purpose is to make basic allegations consistent with the particular ingredients of an offence. But, such specific allegation has not been made in the present case. The Magistrate, it appears, has simply considered the prayer clause and using some rhetorics like he perused the complaint and the documents etc.9. D.Y. Patil College of Engineering v. All India Council for Technical Education, 07-09-2018
All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987 - Whether a private non-aided institutions should be foisted with an application to pay the employee's retrospectively, the salary made applicable to them in terms of the recommendations of the revised pay commission and whether it can be made imperative in such institutions to discharge heavy burden of arrears.
10. Vibgyor Texotech Ltd. v. State of Bank of India, 07-09-2018
Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 - Section 13(2) - the Petitioner has filed and initiated various proceedings itself or through some other persons, are/were not bonafide in nature. Though the Petitioner has exhausted alternative remedy by filing Securitisation Appeal, he has chosen to file this Writ Petition before this Court invoking extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Thus instant Writ Petition is nothing but abuse of process of law.11. Chandrashekar v. Yogi Construction, 07-09-2018
Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - the parties to the arbitration agreement are required to make out their respective cases and the Arbitral Tribunal has to decide the same in accordance with the substantive law for the time being in force in India.12. Ahluwalia Contracts (India) Ltd. v. Bellamy Constructions & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., 06-09-2018
Contract Law - Bank Guarantee - bank guarantee itself is an independent contract - the contractual period of invocation of bank guarantees stood extended by consent of the parties and now it would not be permissible and appropriate for the appellant to raise an issue of time limit of invocation of bank guarantees.
13. Sandip Mrinmoy Chakraboarty v. Reshita Sandip Chakrabarty, 06-09-2018
Family Courts Act, 1984 - Special Marriage Act, 1954 - Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - the Court which is competent to grant a final relief is also competent to grant an interim relief so as to protect the subject matter of the proceedings before it;14. Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) v. Mumbai Metropolitan Regional, 06-09-2018
Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 260A - Payment of compensation on acquisition of certain immovable property.
Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 (Maharashtra) - Section 74 - Mode of executing contracts - the Corporation should not be saddled with liability for unauthorised contracts and with that object provided that, contracts are executed on behalf of the Corporation, in the manner prescribed by authorised person; Pune Municipal Corporation.
Comments
Post a Comment