All Cases

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6610 OF 2004 Prakashanand Rupadevi Trust ... Petitioner versus Narottamananda Guru ... ... Gopalanandaji Brahmchari ... Respondent Mr. G.S. Godbole for Mr. P.R. Arjunwadkar, for the Petitioner. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. 19th August 2004 P.C.: . Issue notice before admission returnable six weeks. Petitioner to serve the Respondent. That be done either personally or by speed post/courier/e-mail/fax and file affidavit of service on or before the returnable date, failing which the petition to stand dismissed for non-prosecution without further reference to the Court. . Status quo as of today be maintained till further orders. (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.)

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.6610 OF 2004 Mr.G.S.Godbole i/b P.R.Arjunwadkar for the Petitioner. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's order or directions Court's or Judge's orders ¦ ¦ ¦ CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH, J. ¦ DATED: 6TH JULY,2005 P.C.: ... Both the courts below have concurrently found that the Plaintiff is not entitled to temporary injunction that he was seeking. In any case, perusal of the application shows that the temporary injunction was sought in such wide terms that no court should pass an order in favour of the Plaintiff. Petition has no substance. It is rejected.

Order - Status 2: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.14771 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders None Present. CORAM : R.M. JOSHI I/c.REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 02nd August, 2016 3 weeks time granted for removing office objections. sd/­ I/c.Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 02.08.16

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3891 OF 2016 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance .. Appellant Vs. Ganesh Rangrao Akurde & Ors. .. Respondents Ms.Varsha Chavan, Advocate for appellant. None for respondents. CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J. DATE : 21ST NOVEMBER 2018 P.C. FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 1 Not on board. Taken upon production. 2 Heard. 3 Admit. 4 Call for record and proceedings. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3891 OF 2016 5 Issue notice of the application, returnable on 30th January 2019. 6 On the applicant depositing the entire amount of compensation as awarded by the Claims Tribunal within a period of four weeks from today before the Claims Tribunal, Kolhapur, execution proceedings shall remain stayed until further orders. (A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)

Order - Status 7: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.1380 OF 2016 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3891 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders None Present. CORAM : V.R. KACHARE REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 30th January, 2019 Await Service for 5 weeks. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 30.01.19

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant V/S Mr. Ganesh Rangrao Akurde And Anr. ....Respondent Ms.Varsha Chavan For Appellant CORAM : K.K. TATED, J DATE : 11th March, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the Appellant , Stand over to 01/04/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant V/S Mr. Ganesh Rangrao Akurde And Anr. ....Respondent Ms Poonam Mittal Adv i/by Varsha Chavan Adv For Appellant Vikrant Anand Desai Adv For Respondent No. 1 CORAM : K.K. TATED, J DATE : 10th April, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the Apellant , Stand over to After vacation ie on 18/6/2019 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant V/S Mr. Ganesh Rangrao Akurde And Anr. ....Respondent Mr D S Joshii/by Varsha Chavan, advocate For Appellant None for Respondent. CORAM : SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J DATE : 18th June, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the petitioners, Stand over to 25/06/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 17: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.10315 OF 2024 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.1380 OF 2016 Ganesh Rangrao Akurde ...Applicant In the matter between:- IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Company Limited ...Appellant vs. SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Digitally signed by SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Date: 2024.09.05 15:24:30 +0530 Ganesh Rangrao Akurde and Anr. ...Respondents ***** Mr.Pritesh K. Bohade:- Advocate for Applicant. Ms.Varsha Chavan:- Advocate for Appellant. ***** CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. DATE : 27th AUGUST 2024 P. C. :- Heard learned Advocate Ms.Chavan for the Appellant Insurance Company and learned Advocate Mr.Bohade for Respondent – Claimant – driver of the motorcycle. Another vehicle involved is the trax. Its number could not be ascertained. The FIR is lodged against the trax vehicle. There was a Petition filed by the driver against the Insurance Company of the motorcycle under the provisions of Section 163A of the MV Act, 1988. 3. The Appeal is of the year 2016. Recently, this Application for withdrawal is filed. Withdrawal is strongly opposed by learned Advocate Ms.Chavan. She relied upon the observations in case of Ramkhiladi and Anr. v/s. United India Insurance Company and Anr. 1 and more specifically, Para No.5.5 and 5.6. According to her, the Appeal can be disposed of finally. Compilation of documents filed by her is taken on record. Marked 'X' for identification. Copy is served to other side. Stand over to 4 th September 2024. To be listed for final arguments / Interim Application. [S. M. MODAK, J.] 1 AIR 2020 SUPREME COURT 527

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited....APPELLANT V/S Mr. Ganesh Rangrao Akurde And Anr. ....RESPONDENT WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 10315 OF 2024 In First Appeal 1380 OF 2016 Ganesh Rangrao Akurde And Anr. ....PETITIONER V/S Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited And Anr. ....RESPONDENT Ms. Varsha Chavan for the Appellant Mr. Pritesh K. Bohade for Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S. M. MODAK J DATE : 4th September, 2024 P.C. : At the request of the learned Counsel for the Appellant(s)/ Applicant(s) / Petitioner(s) / Respondent No. stand over to 03/10/2024. Ad-interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 20: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited....APPELLANT V/S Mr. Ganesh Rangrao Akurde And Anr. ....RESPONDENT VARSHA CHAVAN for Petitioner VIKRANT ANAND DESAI for Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S. M. MODAK J DATE : 3rd October, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 20/11/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited....APPELLANT V/S Mr. Ganesh Rangrao Akurde And Anr. ....RESPONDENT WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 10315 OF 2024 In First Appeal 1380 OF 2016 Ganesh Rangrao Akurde And Anr. ....PETITIONER V/S Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited And Anr. ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHIVKUMAR DIGE J DATE : 28th January, 2025 P.C. : For final hearing on dated 03/02/2025 Weekly Board. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 25: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Company Limited. …. Appellant Versus Ganesh Rangrao Akurde and Anr. …. Respondents Ms. Varsha Chavan, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr. Pritesh K. Bohade, Advocate for Respondent No.1. CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 18th JUNE, 2025. P.C. : SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM Digitally signed by SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM Date: 2025.06.21 10:05:31 +0530 Heard learned counsel for the Appellant and learned counsel for the Respondent – Claimant. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the claim petition was filed under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short "MV Act'). The accident occurred due to sole negligence of the deceased but the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.4,23,920/-. As per view of Hon'ble Apex Court in the Case of Ramkhiladi and Anr. Vs. United India Insurance Company and Anr. AIR 2020 SCC 527, the Claimant is entitled of Rs.1,00,000/-, but this fact has not been considered by the Tribunal. Hence, requested to allow the appeal. Learned counsel for the Respondent submits the Claimant is ready to accept Rs.1,00,000/- out of the deposited compensation amount. Hence, requested to pass appropriate order. Considering the submission of both the learned counsel, I pass following order. ORDER i. Appeal is allowed. ii. The Respondent/Claimant is entitled Rs.1,00,000/- @ 8% interest from the date of filing claim petition, till realization of the amount. iii. The Claimant is permitted to withdraw Rs.1,00,000/- @ 8% interest along with accrued interest thereon from the amount, deposited by the Appellant/Insurance Company. iv. The Appellant /Insurance Company is permitted to withdraw remaining amount along with accrued interest. v. The statutory amount along with accrued interest be transmitted to the Tribunal. The parties are at liberty to withdraw it, as per Rules. vi. Record and Proceeding be sent back to the Tribunal. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed and disposed of. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ( SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1836 OF 2009 Kashi Mitha Tandel. .. Petitioner. vs. Chief of Police, Nani Daman, & Ors. .. Respondents. Mr. Uday Warunjikar for the petitioner. Mr. R.M. More, APP., for the Respondent/State. CORAM : J. N. PATEL & A. A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 23RD NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C. : Issue notice to respondents returnable two weeks. Notice be sent by registered post A.D., in addition to usual mode of service. S.O. to 7.12.2009. ( J. N. PATEL, J.) ( A. A. SAYED, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION No.1836/2009 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's Orders Mr Manoj Shirsat i/b Uday P. Warunjikar for the Petitioner. Mr D.A. Nalavade – for Union of India for Respondent No.1. Mr S.N. Gawate, A.P.P.,for the State. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE & A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 23RD MARCH, 2010 P.C. :- Mr Nalavade, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent, seeks three week's time to file reply affidavit. He may do so with an advance copy thereof to the advocate for the petitioner. Stand over to 12th April, 2010. (A.R.JOSHI,J.) (D.B.BHOSALE,J.)

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Writ Petition No.1836 of 2009 1 Smt.Kashi Mitha Tandel Petitioner Vs. Chief of Police, Nani Daman, Union Territory & ors. Respondents Mr.R.M.More i/b. Mr.U.P.Warunjikar for petitioner. Mr.J.P.Yagnik, APP for State. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. June 17, 2010. P.C. We are informed across the bar that Mr.Nalawade has been hospitalised and though affidavit of the police office is filed, a copy of the same has not yet been served on the learned counsel for the petitioner by Mr.Nalawade. Stand over for two weeks. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.) srk

Order - Status 17: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1836 OF 2009 Smt. Kashi Mitha Tandel ....Petitioner. Vs. Chief of Police, Nani Daman, Union Territory & Ors. ....Respondents. Mr. Uday Warunjikar a/w Mr. Rahul More for the Petitioner. Mr. D.A. Nalawade, Special P.P. for U.O.I. Mr. J.P. Yagnik, APP for the State. CORAM : B.H. MARLAPALLE & ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATE : 8th July, 2010 P.C.: 1 Heard Mr. Warunjikar a/w Mr.Rahul More, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. Nalawade, the Special P.P. for the Respondents. We have perused the affidavit in reply filed by Shri K.B. Mahajan, P.S.I., Khanvel in the Union Territory of Dadara and Nagar Haveli. 2 The affidavit clearly states that the report received from the Government Examiner, GEQD, Hyderabad dated 15/02/2010 supports, prima facie, the complainant's case. 3 Mr. Nalawade, further states that the affiant Shri K.B. Mahajan has been transferred and in his place Mr. M.R. Rohit, P.I. from Daman Police station, is the I.O.. We direct the I.O. to take further steps as required under the Criminal Procedure Code including filing of chargesheet under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the Competent Court as expeditiously as possible and preferably before 7th August, 2010. 4 The Petition is disposed off in terms of the above directions. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE, J.)

Order - Status 5: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16008 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court's Court's or orders or directions & Judge's orders. Registrar's orders. – Shri U.J. Makhija along with Roshan Pinto i/by Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt and Caroe for the Applicant. CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.P.BHANGALE, JJ DATED : 20TH MARCH 2015 P.C.: . Rule, returnable on 6th May 2015. In addition to the service through Court, private service is permitted. (A.P.BHANGALE, J) (A.S.OKA, J)

Order - Status 7: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16008 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Advocate for the R.No.2 Present. CORAM : R.M. JOSHI, REGISTRAR (JUDL ­ II) Date : 06th May, 2015 Await Service for 6 weeks. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­ II) dsm – R(J­II) – 06.05.15

Order - Status 9: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16008 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Advocate for the Applicant Present. CORAM : R.M. JOSHI, REGISTRAR (JUDL ­ II) Date : 17th June, 2015 Re­issue Notice to Respondent No.1, returnable after 6 weeks. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­ II) dsm – R(J­II) – 17.06.15

Order - Status 11: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16008 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Advocate for the Appellant Present. Advocate for the Respondent Present. CORAM : R.M. JOSHI REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 29th July, 2015 Await Service for 4 weeks. 67 Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm ­ R(J­II) – 29.07.15

Order - Status 12: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16008 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Advocate for the Appellant Present. Advocate for the Respondent No.2 Present. CORAM : R.M. JOSHI REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 26th August, 2015 S.O. to 4 weeks for taking steps as against unserved Respondent No.4. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 26 .08.15

Order - Status 14: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16008 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Advocate for the Petitioner Present. Advocate for the Respondent No.2 Present. CORAM : R.M. JOSHI REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 23rd September, 2015 Both Ld. Counsel submits that there is error in office remark about Respondent No.4 instead of Respondent No.1. Order dated 26/08/2015 corrected. S.O. to 4 weeks. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 23.09.15

Order - Status 16: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16008 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Advocate for the Appellant Present. Advocate for the Respondent No.2 Present. CORAM : R.M. JOSHI REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 21st October, 2015 S.O. to 4 weeks for taking steps as against unserved Respondent No.1. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 21.10.15

Order - Status 18: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16008 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Advocate for the Appellant Present. CORAM : R.M. JOSHI REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 19th January, 2016 Advocate for the Appellant makes statement that he has already filed Affidavit alongwith copies of Newspapers regarding service of Respondent No.1. Office to verify and matter to proceed. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 19.01.16

Order - Status 22: Shephali IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST NO. 16008 OF 2014 The Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay …Applicant Versus Madanlal Shah & Co & Anr …Respondents Mr UJ Makhija *, i/b Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe, for the Appellant.* Ms Naseem Sumnani *, for Respondent No. 2.* CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 12th July 2017 PC:- 1. There is a delay of 103 days in filing the First Appeal. The delay is sufficiently explained in the Civil Application. It is condoned. 2. The Civil Application is made absolute and disposed of accordingly. No costs. (G. S. PATEL, J) Page 1 of 1 12th July 2017

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1021 OF 2014 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.450 OF 2014 Smt. Bhagirathi Haribhau Yadav & Ors. ...Applicants V/s. Shri Dnyaneshwar Vishnu Kate & Ors. ...Respondents Mr. R.B. Raghuvanshi i/b. Miss Rutuja Ambekar for the Applicants. Mr. S.G. Kudle for Respondent No.10. CORAM : A.B. CHAUDHARI, J. DATED : OCTOBER 08, 2014. P.C. : 1 Heard the learned counsel for the rival parities. 2 For the present, the controversy is only about Survey No.119/2/B. I quote paragraph 42 from the judgment of the lower appellate Court which reads thus : " From this purpose entries in 7/12 extract of land survey no.119 at Exh.265 for the year 194344 is also material to consider. This entry shows that land was acquired by military and Mahadu and Vishnu had taken the land for cultivation from military. Anyhow one thing is clear that land gat no.119 was acquired by the government and Mahadu and heirs of Vishnu had received that compensation as per their respective shares. If this is the position then it has to be said that tenancy rights of the family came to an end and land gat no.119 became the property of the government." 3 The observation made in paragraph 41 and paragraph 42 shows that the land had vested in the Government in its military department. The finding is based on the basis of mutation entries but there it is not clear as contended by Mr. Kudale nor it is substantiated by the documentary evidence that the Government had released the land after it had vested in it. The parties are at liberty to place the documents of release, if any, on record, since Second Appeal No.450 of 2014 is admitted for final hearing. However, looking at the finding in paragraph 42 as above, it appears prima facie that neither the appellant nor the respondent would be able to claim any right to go ahead with the construction on the said land or as the case may be without hearing the concerned Government. Hence I make the following order : ORDER i) The appellant to join the concerned Government as a party to the present Civil Application as well as Second Appeal and effect service before the next date. ii) Issue notice to the newly added party in both Second Appeal as well as Civil Application, returnable after vacation for hearing on this application. iii) Till the decision of the application finally the earlier order granting statusquo shall continue in operation. iv) S.O. for 6 weeks. (A. B. CHAUDHARI, J.) waghmare.

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION No.1021 OF 2014 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.450 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's orders. Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Mr.Ratnesh Dube i/b Ms.Rutuja Ambekar for the applicants Mr.S.G.Kudle for the respondent No.10. CORAM : K.K.TATED, J. DATED : 26/11/2014 PC : 1 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2 Liberty granted to the respondents to file their additional AffidavitinReply and serve copy on the other side. 3 Liberty granted to the applicants to file reply to the said affidavit, if they so desire and serve copy on the other side on or before the next date. 4 Stand over for two weeks. 5 Interim protection, if any, granted earlier to continue till next date. (K.K.TATED, J.)

Order - Status 12: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1021 OF 2014 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 450 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's orders Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Mr. Ratnesh Dube i/b Rutuja Ambekar for the applicant. Mr. S.G. Kudle for respondent no.10. CORAM : K. K. TATED, J. DATED : 15/12/2014. P.C.: . Not on board. At the request of Advocate for the respondent no.10, matter is taken on board for urgent orders. 2 Liberty granted to the applicant to serve unserved respondent by private notice either by registered post A.D. and/or by hand delivery and file Affidavit of Service to that effect. 3 Matter to appear on board on 23.12.2014. (K.K.TATED, J.)

Order - Status 14: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1021 OF 2014 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 450 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's orders r Jud ge's or ders Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Mr. R.P. Mr. R.P. Raghuvanshi i/b R.A. Ambekar for the i/b R.A. Ambekar for the applicant. Mr. S.G. Kudle for the respondent no.10. Ms. Jyotsna Pandi & P.S. Gujar for Union of India. CORAM : K. K. TATED, J. DATED : 23/12/2014. P.C.: . Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2 The learned counsel for the appellant submits that Appellant no.1 Smt. Bhagirathi Haribhau Yadav expired yesterday i.e. 22.12.2014. Hence, he requires some time to take appropriate steps for bringing her legal heirs on record. 3 On his request, matter adjourned to 19.01.2015. 4 Interim protection, if any, granted earlier to continue till next date. (K.K.TATED, J.)

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1021 OF 2014 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 450 OF 2014 Smt. Bhagirathi Haribhau Yadav and Ors. Applicants : V/S : Dnyaneshwar Vishnu Kate and Ors. Respondents * * * * * Mr. R.B. Raghuvanshi a/w. Mr. Ratnesh Dube i/by. Ms. Rutuja Ambekar, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. S.G. Kudle, Advocate for respondent no.10. Mrs. Jyotsna Pandhi with Mr. P.S. Gujar, Advocate for respondents no.21 to 25. Mr. Rajan Pawar, AGP for respondents no.26 and 27. * * * * * * Coram :- Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J. 11th February, 2015. P.C. :- 1). Adjourned for reply of the Government to 25th February, 2015. Copy of the affidavit-in-reply shall be furnished in advance to the appellant and other respondents. (SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J)

Order - Status 23: Chittewan 1/5 C.A.1021-14 O.O. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1021 OF 2014 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.450 OF 2014 Smt. Bhagirathi Haribhau Yadav and ors. .. Applicants/ Appellants (Org.Plaintiffs) V/s Dnyaneshwar Vishnu Kate and Ors. .. Respondents. (Org.Defendants) AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 170 OF 2015 IN CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1021 OF 2014 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.450 OF 2014 R.N. Yadav @ Dhariya .. Applicant (Org.Respondent No.10) In the matter between Smt. Bhagirathi Haribhau Yadav and ors. .. Applicants/ Appellants (Org.Plaintiffs) V/s Dnyaneshwar Vishnu Kate and Ors. .. Respondents. (Org.Defendants) Mr. R.B. Raghuvanshi a/w Ratnesh Dube i/b Ms Rutuja Ambekar, for Applicants. Mr. S.G. Kudle, for Respondent No.10. Mrs. Jyotsna Pandhi with Mr. P.S. Gujar, for Respondents No.21 to 25. Mr. Rajan Pawar, AGP for Respondents No.26 and 27. Coram : Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J. Date : 25th March, 2015 P.C. This is a common order on the above two Civil Applications. Civil Application No.1021 of 2014 is taken out by the appellants for interim injunction to restrain respondent No.1 from dealing with or developing one of the suit properties i.e. the land at Survey No.119/2B of Pimple Saudagar, pending the disposal of the Second Appeal. Civil Application No.170 of 2015 is taken out by respondent No.10 for clarification that the adinterim order dated 08th October, 2014 passed on the Civil Application of the appellants is no more in operation in view of the subsequent order dated 12th December, 2014. The other relief sought by respondent No.10 is to direct the appellants to file an undertaking in the form of bank guarantee to the effect that in the event respondent No.10 succeeds in the appeal, the appellants will compensate him for the losses suffered on account of delay in the decision in the Second Appeal. The Second Appeal arises out of the suit filed by the appellants for partition of the joint family properties. The appeal was admitted on 06th August, 2014 with observations that prima facie it appears that there was no reason for the Appellate Court to exclude properties at Survey No.119/2B and 18/7 from partition and separate possession. These two properties are claimed to have been purchased by respondent No.10 from respondent No.1 by the sale deed dated 09th June, 1983. The Lower Appellate Court has recorded a finding that the properties had been owned jointly by Vishnu, Laxman and Mahadev. Respondent No.1 is the son of Vishnu. In view of this factual position, the Second Appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law : Whether the appellate Court was right in excluding Survey No.119/2B and 18/7 from the partition and separate possession ? Whether learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.10 waives service of the notice ? It appears that during pendency of the proceedings, some portion of the properties came to be acquired by Government of India. Therefore, by order dated 08th December, 2014, the appellants were directed to amend the Civil Application to implead the concerned parties. Accordingly, amendment was carried out and seven persons were impleaded to the Civil Application. They are (1) Union of India, (2) Director General, Defence Estate, (3) Principal Director, Defence Estate, (4) Defence Estate officer, Southern Command, (5) Commanding Officer, Southern Command, (6) State of Maharashtra and (7) The Collector of Pune. The interim relief in operation during pendency of the suit was direction to respondent No.10 to maintain statusquo in respect of the properties at Survey No.119/2B and 18/7. This order has been continued with observation that if respondent No.10 is allowed to deal with the properties or carry out the construction, the same would lead to further complication which should be avoided. Mr. Kudgle, the learned advocate for respondent No.10 submits that the order dated 23rd December, 2014 passed this Court, is no longer in operation since the same has not been specifically continued. He also submits that respondent No.10, who had purchased the properties as far back as in the year 1983 is unable to enjoy the properties purchased by him. Considering the nature of the substantial questions of law framed, properties in question need to be preserved in the same condition during pendency of the Second Appeal. Hence, the Civil Application No.1021 of 2014 is allowed and Civil Application No.170 of 2015 is dismissed. (Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J.)

Order - Status 7: Vidya Amin IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.384 OF 2014 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION No. 691 OF 2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1267 OF 2015 Sudhakar Lobhaji Ghaitadkay ... Appellant Vs. Madhukar Lobhaji Ghaitadkay & Ors. ... Respondents Mr. Atul S. Tungare, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Girish M. Joshi, Advocate for respondent No. 1. CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE: 29th January, 2018. P.C.: This Appeal is pending for admission since 2014. In between, Civil Application No. 1264 of 2015 was moved by the appellant for bringing legal heirs of deceased respondent No. 1-Madhukar Lobhaji Ghaitadkay. In the Application, it is prayed that respondent nos. 1A to 1E are the legal heirs of deceased respondent No. 1. Another Civil Application No. 691 of 2015 was preferred by the appellant in February, 2015 praying that respondent nos. 6A and 6B are to be brought on record in the event of death of respondent No. 6-Usha Ashok Sonawane. The learned counsel for the appellant/applicant submitted that in bringing the legal heirs of deceased respondent No. 6, i.e., 6A and 6B, there is delay of 211 days in filing the Application because he had mistaken belief that legal heirs of deceased respondent no.6 -Usha Ashok Sonawane are already on record and hence delay is caused. The learned counsel for original respondent No. 1 is present. He submitted that one of the legal heirs of deceased respondent No. 1 is dead, however, he wants to verify. In view of this, for the reasons mentioned in Civil Application No. 691 of 2015, delay is condoned. Civil Application Nos. 1267 of 2015 and 691 of 2015 for bringing their respective legal heirs on record are allowed. The legal heirs of deceased respondent No. 1 and deceased respondent No. 6 are to be brought on record. Amendment to be carried out within one week. Place the Appeal from Order for admission on 26th February, 2018. (MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4846 OF 2005 ...................................................... Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court's Court's or Judge's orders or directions and orders Registrar's orders ...................................................... Law Global for the Applicant. Ms S.D.Shinde, A.P.P. for the Respondent No.1. Mr. Sanjay Khemka, Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. DATE : AUGUST 05, 2005. P.C.: 1. The Respondent No.2 appearing in person mentioned this matter at 02.00 p.m. for adjournment. The prayer made by the Respondent No.2 appearing in person was opposed by the Advocate for the Applicant on the ground that the Applicant desires to obtain ad-interim relief. None appears for the Applicant when the Application is called out. Dismissed for default. JUDGE

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4797 OF 2005 Sanjay Sitaram Khemka .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4846 OF 2005 Sampatraj Adania .. Applicant. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents. Mr.S.S.Khemka, applicant in person in CA No.4797/05 and respondent no.2 in person in CA No.4846/05. Mr.Subhash Jha i/b Law Global for respondent no.3 in CA No.4797/05 and for the applicant. in CA No.4846/05. Mr.R.Y.Mirza A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 3RD AUGUST, 2006 P.C.: . Heard Sanjay Khemka in person and Mr.Subhash Jha, learned counsel for respondent-Sampatraj Adania and Mr.R.Y.Mirza learned A.P.P. for the State. Both the applications challenge one and the same order dated 15.7.2005 passed on the application Nos.162/N/2005 and 127/N/2005 filed under section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. I am informed that application bearing No.121/N/2005 field by Mr.Sanjay Khemka on 3.3.2005 under section 451 was also pending at the relevant time. I heard the applicant - Sanjay Khemka in both the applications in person and Mr.Jha for the respondent-Sampatraj Adania. Both, the applicant-Khemka and Mr.Jha have fairly stated that I need not record the reasons for setting aside the order dated 15.7.2005 passed on the application nos.162/N/2005 and 127/N/2005 and the parties would be satisfied by the order that I proposed to pass. Hence the following order: (a) The order dated 15.7.2005 passed below application nos.127/N/2005 and 162/N/2005 by the Special Metropolitan Magistrate, 48th Court, Andheri is quashed and set aside. Both the applications stand restored to file. (b) The learned Magistrate shall hear and decide, application nos.127/N/2005 and 162/N/2005 with the application of Sanjay Khemka bearing No.121/N/2005 afresh as expeditiously as possible and preferrably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. The learned Magistrate may also hear application/s, if any, under section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure alongwith the aforesaid 2 applications. The learned Magistrate shall give hearing to all the concerned parties while passing the order on the aforesaid applications for return of property under section 451 of the Code and decide all the applications on merits in accordance with law. . With these directions the applications are disposed of. (D.B.Bhosale, J.)

Order - Status 14: 1 (APPR 211 of 2010 in REVN 412 of 2004) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 211 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 412 OF 2004 M/s.Chunilal Mangilal ...Applicant Vs. Phoenix (India) and Ors. ...Respondents ----- Mr.Subhash Jha i/b. Law Global for Applicant Mr. Ganesh Gole for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 Mr.P.S. Hingorani -APP for the State ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 22ND NOVEMBER, 2010 P.C. This is an application for expeditious disposal of the criminal application no. 412 of 2004. The learned counsel for the Applicant does not want to press this application at this stage since I am inclined to hear the criminal application No. 412 of 2004 for final hearing 2 (APPR 211 of 2010 in REVN 412 of 2004) today itself. Hence, criminal application No. 211 of 2010 is disposed of . (V.M. KANADE J.) 3 (APPR 211 of 2010 in REVN 412 of 2004)

#VALUE!