Allahabad High Court- 2019-January-10

Sangeeta Chandra, J

1. Heard Sri Vishal Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashish Goyal, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner / tenant challenging the order dated 9.4.2018 passed by the District Judge, Hathras in SCC Revision No. 101 of 2018 and the order dated 9.3.2018 passed by the learned Trial Court in SCC Suit No. 7 of 2013 allowing the application under Section 151 Civil Procedure Co

Allahabad High Court- 2019-January-09

Ram Krishna Gautam, J

1. This Criminal Appeal under section 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.) has been filed as Jail Appeal through the Superintendent of Jail, Ghaziabad, u/s 383 Cr.P.C. against judgment of conviction and sentence dated 30.5.2012 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Hapur, District Ghaziabad, in S.T. No. 436 of 2009, State Vs. Shrawan alias Sarwan, arising out of Case Crime No. 349 of 2008, u/s 302 I.P.C., Police Sta

Allahabad High Court- 2019-January-08

@JUDGMENTTAG-JUDGMENT

Sangeeta Chandra, J

1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner who is present in the Court. Learned counsel for the respondent is not present.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out from the order sheet that repeatedly time has been granted for filing counter affidavit to the respondents.

3. On 9.1.2018, this Court had granted one month and no more time. Thereafter also the matter has been listed

Bombay High Court- 2019-January-07

1. The petitioner has invoked Article 227 of Constitution of India and inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the impugned orders and the proceedings initiated by respondent No.2 under Section 138 read with 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

2. The brief facts emanating from the complaint filed by the respondent No.2 are as follows :­

a) The complainant is a public limited company incorporated under

Bombay High Court- 2019-January-07

1. This is an appeal under under Section 378(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 30th June, 1997 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur in Session Case No. 206 of 1996.

2. The Respondent accused was charged for an offence punishable under section 498­A, 306 of Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case as emanates from the evidence of P.W. No.3 Hanumant Balu Gadivadar (father of deceased Kamal) is that Respondent/acc

Bombay High Court- 2019-January-04

1] Heard Shri D.R. Bhoyar, the learned counsel for the appellants and Shri H.D. Dangre, the learned counsel for the respondents.

2] The internecine dispute between brothers and sisters who belong to the Gond tribe has reached this Court in Second Appeal. At stake, is the house property and agricultural land (“the suit property” for short) owned by their deceased father Bapurao Kodape, who indubitably died intestate. Both the Courts below have concurrently held that the dau

Bombay High Court- 2019-January-04

1. This appeal is directed by M/s Shriram General Insurance Company Limited, against the judgment and award, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Majalgaon, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 7 of 2014, whereas compensation of Rs.40,17,602/­ is awarded by the Tribunal and liability is saddled on original respondent no.2 owner of the offending Truck No. MH­20/AT­2468 and original respondent no.3 insurance company (present appellant).

2. Respondent nos. 1 to 5 in

Bombay High Court- 2019-January-04

S.S. SHINDE, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2. This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed with following substantive prayer:

“B] To quash and set aside E­tender notice dated 03­11­2018 issued by respondent No.2 inviting tenders for supply (Exhibit C) by issuing appropriate writ or order or direction in the nature of wr

Bombay High Court- 2019-January-04

@JUDGMENTTAG-JUDGMENT

1. This appeal is directed by original respondent No.2 – New India Assurance Company Ltd. against judgment and award passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Latur (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal") passed in M.A.C.P. No. 379 of 2005. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are the original claimants. Respondent No.4 is original respondent No.1, who is the owner of Tractor bearing registration No. MH­24­D­2177, involved in the accident (hereinafter referred to as "o