All First Appeal
Respondent-1: Eagsawa Harijan And Anr.
Petitioner-1: Vijay Constructions
Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.642 OF 2012 IN DRAFT NOTICE OF MOTION NO. OF 2012 IN SUIT STAMP NO.1400 OF 2012 IN S.C.SUIT NO.1387 OF 2012 Umesh Laxmikant Raikar ....Appellant Vs. Dilip Vasant Raikar ....Respondent Mr. U. S. R. Singh for the Appellant. Mr. Lalit Jain for Respondent. CORAM : SMT. R.P.SONDURBALDOTA,J. DATE : 26th JULY 2012 P.C. : Mr. Lalit Jain, the learned Counsel for the Respondent points out that the submissions on the Notice of Motion have been substantially completed. The Respondent has completed his submissions and the submissions of the Appellant are partly complete. The Notice of Motion is kept for further hearing on 31st July 2012. In this circumstance, S.O. to 24th August 2012. (SMT. R. P. SONDURBALDOTA,J.)
Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 642 OF 2012 AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 830 OF 2012 Umesh Laxmikant Raikar ...Appellant/Applicant V/s. Dilip Vasant Raikar ...Respondent Mr. U.S.R. Singh for the Appellant/Applicant Mr. Lalit V. Jain for the Respondent CORAM: RANJIT MORE, J. DATE: AUGUST 28, 2012 P.C.:- Mr. Sigh, learned counsel for the appellant, seeks leave to withdraw this Appeal from Order, as the respondent's Notice of Motion has been dismissed on 17th August, 2012. Leave is granted. Appeal from Order is disposed of as withdrawn. Civil Application does not survive, and stands disposed of accordingly. ( RANJIT MORE, J.)
1) Document Filed: Vakalatnama
Advocate: Mr. Lalit V. Jain
Filed Document - Date of Receiving - 1: 10/07/2012
Respondent-1: Dilip Vasant Raikar
Petitioner-1: Umesh Laxmikant Raikar
Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 173 OF 2005 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3562 OF 2004 IN L. C. SUIT NO. 3925 OF 2004 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 495 OF 2005. Parsi Panchayat Funds and Properties and another. ..Appellants. vs. Kishore Patel and others. ..Respondents. Mr. Rajiv Narula, i/b. M/s. Jhangiani, Narula & Assoc., for Appellants. .... .... Mr. S.K. Sonawane, for RespondentBMC. CORAM : SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J. DATE : 19TH JUNE, 2012. P.C. Mr. Narula states that the appeal has become infructuous in view of final disposal of the suit. The appeal from order is accordingly disposed off. In view of the disposal of the Appeal, Civil Application no. 495 of 2005 does not survive. The same is accordingly disposed off. ( SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J. )
1) Document Filed: Vakalatnama
Advocate: Shri.S.H.Ujjainwala For Bmc (N.A. Filed)
Filed Document - Date of Receiving - 1: 21/11/2005
2) Document Filed: Vakalatnama
Advocate: M/S. D.H. Petit And Co. For R.No.1
Filed Document - Date of Receiving - 2: 06/09/2005
Respondent-1: Kishore Patel
Respondent-2: Ors.
Petitioner-1: Parsi Panchayat Funds
Petitioner-2: Properties
Petitioner-3: Anr.
1) Document Filed: Vakalatnama
Filed By : R.No.1 To 3
Advocate: Shri. D.S.Sawant
Filed Document - Date of Receiving - 1: 02/04/2004
Respondent-1: Baliram V. Patil
Respondent-2: Ors.
Petitioner-1: The State Of Maharashtra
Respondent-1: Nakubai Yashwant Mate
Petitioner-1: The State Of Maharashtra
Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3260 OF 2015 A/W CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3261 OF 2015 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.14661 OF 2015 The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. ... Applicant/Appellant Vs. Smt.Shobha Babasaheb Babar & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.S.M. Dange for the Applicant/Appellant Mr.V.R. Gaikwad for Respondent Nos.1 to 6 CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE: 30th SEPTEMBER, 2015 P.C.: Civil Application No.3260 of 2015 is filed for condonation of delay of 15 days in preferring the appeal. The learned Counsel for the respondent is present. He concedes to the condonation of delay. Hence, this application is allowed. Appeal be numbered. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3261 OF 2015: - By this Civil Application, the applicant / insurance Company seeks stay to the operation and execution of the impugned judgement and award dated 25.11.2014 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Satara in MACP No.535 of 2012. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the insurance company is ready to deposit the entire decretal amount alongwith interest accrued thereon, within a period of six weeks. In view of the above, interim stay granted to the operation and execution of the impugned judgement and award dated 25.11.2014 subject to the applicant depositing in the MACT, Satara the entire decretal amount alongwith interest accrued thereon, within a period of six weeks from today. The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited in this Court at the time of filing of appeal shall be transferred to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Satara. Civil Application stands disposed of accordingly. (MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) CERTIFICATE Certified that this Judgment/Order uploaded is a true and correct copy of original signed Judgment/Order.
Respondent-1: Shobha Babasaheb Babar
Respondent-2: Others
Petitioner-1: The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Respondent-1: Shri. Shivram Soma Shevre
Petitioner-1: The State Of Maharashtra (through The Special Land Acquisition Officer)
Petitioner-2: Anr.
Respondent-1: Righ Channel Construction Pvt. Ltd.
Petitioner-1: Ramesh Savjibhai Gajjar
Order - Status 5: APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 579 OF 2011 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 3907 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Mr. Indrajeet R. Kulkarni for the Applicant/ Appellant. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 28th FEBRUARY, 2011 P.C.: Issue notice to the respondents returnable at the end of ten weeks. Notice is issued subject to the condition that irrespective of the result of the application, the applicant/appellant shall be required to pay costs of the application to the respondents which are quantified at Rs. 5000/. In addition to the court's notice the applicant shall serve the respondents by a private notice and file affidavit of service within nine weeks. S.O. for 10 weeks. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)
Order - Status 9: CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 579 OF 2011 IN FIRST APPEAL (stamp) NO. 3907 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Mr. Indrajeet R. Kulkarni for the Applicant. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 06th June, 2011. P.C. 1 Office remark shows that the cost amount of Rs. 5,000/ has not been deposited. The learned counsel appearing for the Applicant is unable to make a statement that the amount has been deposited. 2 Hence, in view of noncompliance with the order dated 28th February, 2011, the application stands dismissed for nonprosecution. 3 Civil Application No.580 of 2011 does not survive and the same is disposed of. [ A.S.OKA, J ]
Respondent-1: 1. Ajay Ramchandra Mahadik
Respondent-2: Anr.
Petitioner-1: The Oriental Insurance Co.ltd
Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE FIRST APPEAL NO.1400 OF 2005 -----------------------------------:------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.M.V.Shingade i/b Mr.G.N.Salunke for the appellants. Mr.N.V.Walavalkar i/b Mr.Sanjeev Singh for respondent no.1. Mr.J.J.Xavier for the respondent no.2. CORAM: D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED: 14TH NOVEMBER, 2006. P.C. : . Heard learned counsel for the parties. Mr.Walavalkar, learned senior counsel for respondent no.1 seeks liberty to file paper book and has also tendered the same in the court. He has also served a copy of the paper book on the other side. The paper book is accepted and in view thereof printing is dispensed with. Office is directed to place the appeal for hearing, as directed earlier by this court vide order dated 4.10.2006, in the week commencing from 27.11.2006. It is open for the appellants to file additional paper book, if they so desire, before 27.11.2006. (D.B.Bhosale, J.)
Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1400 OF 2005. New Borivali Prajakta Cooperative Housing ... Society Ltd. Appellant. Versus. M/s.Ashirwad Builders and others. ... Respondents. None for the Appellant. Shri Sanjeer Singh the Respondent No.1. CORAM : ABHAY S.OKA, J. DATED : 9th January, 2007. P.C.: 1.Not on board. Taken on board. 2.The Appeals of the year 1985 onwards are pending for final hearing and therefore, no specific date of hearing as of today can be fixed in this Appeal of the year 2005. No orders. Judge.
Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1400 OF 2005 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Court's or Judge's Orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - None present. CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J. DATED : 27th August, 2007 P.C. 1.Stand over after twelve weeks. [ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.]
Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.1400 of 2005 ... New Borivli Prajakta CHS Ltd. Appellant versus M/s.Ashirwad Builders & Anr Respondents None for the appellant. Mr.Sushil K. Chaurasia,Advocate for respondent no.1. CORAM : A.P. BHANGALE,J DATED : SEPTEMBER 6, 2013 P.C. 1 This appeal is preferred against judgment and order dated 5 May 2005 passed by Bombay City Civil Court in L.C.Suit No.925 of 2004. The appellant herein (original plaintiff) had filed suit for declaration that plan sanctioned by Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay in favour of M/s.Ashirwad Builders firm having office at 1, Jai Abhilasha, Jai Raj Nagar, Linking Road, Borivali (West), Mumbai 400 092, is illegal and for permanent injunction against defendant no.1 seeking to restrain him from constructing the building pursuant to sanctioned plan on the plot no.135 at 57 Road, Borivali (West) Mumbai. 2 It is submitted on behalf of respondent no.1 that earlier the appellant plaintiff had filed Suit No.1679 of 2002 for perpetual injunction against the respondent builder. It was compromised between the parties and detailed consent terms were recorded in the said suit whereby parties are, and were bound. The respondent no.1 offered payment but it was refused by plaintiff deliberately. According to learned Advocate for the respondent, he was and is ready and willing to observe those terms mentioned in consent terms as the same are binding between the parties to the suit. Therefore, any question arising in relation to execution discharge and satisfaction of decree by consent terms in L.C. Suit No.1679 of 2002 ought to have been dealt with in execution of decree in the said suit in view of section 47 of Code of Civil Procedure and not otherwise. Furthermore, it is contended that respondent no.1 is entitled to construct in accordance with sanctioned plan by Municipal Corporation of Gr.Mumbai and plaintiff have no right to claim any injunction against respondent no.1 when they are acting lawfully constructing in accordance with sanctioned plan. 3 Nobody appeared on behalf of plaintiffs appellant although they are represented by Advocate Mr.G.N.Salunkhe on record. 4 For the reasons stated above therefore, there is no merit in the appeal as a remedy for the appellant is to execute the decree by consent terms as finalised in S.C.Suit No.1679 of 2002. 6 Interim order, if any, stands vacated. ( A.P. BHANGALE, J )
1) Document Filed: Report
Filed By : Prakash H.Chogle
Filed Document - Date of Receiving - 1: 29/08/2005
2) Document Filed: Vakalatnama
Advocate: Shri. Sanjeev Singh For R.No.1
Filed Document - Date of Receiving - 2: 28/03/2006
3) Document Filed: Vakalatnama
Advocate: Sushil K. Chaurasia For Respondent No 1
Filed Document - Date of Receiving - 3: 04/10/2012
Respondent-1: Ashirwad Builders
Respondent-2: Anr.
Petitioner-1: New Borivali Prajakata Co-op.housing Society Ltd.