All Cases

Order - Status 7: 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.

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.6038 OF 2021 Limbaji Bhimrao Thore Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent None present for Petitioner. Mrs.M.H.Mhatre, APP, for State. CORAM : A.S.GADKARI AND PRAKASH D.NAIK, JJ. DATE : 16th January 2023 PC : Petitioner has been issued strict warning by Jail Authority for returning one day late to Jail, when he was released on emergency parole leave. Perusal of record indicates that Competent Authority has not committed any error while issuing strict warning to the Petitioner for his returning late to Jail Authority by one day. The petition is accordingly dismissed. (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) (A.S.GADKARI, J.) MST

Order - Status 5: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2565 OF 2011 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1378 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. S.S.Kulkarni for the Applicant. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 27th July, 2011. P.C. . Rule, returnable on 23rd September, 2011. 2 In addition to service of notice through Court, advocate for the Applicant shall serve private notice by Registered Post A.D. and/or by courier service and/or by hand delivery to the Respondent and shall file affidavit of service one week before the returnable date failing which the application will stand dismissed for nonprosecution. 3 There will be adinterim relief in terms of prayer clause (a) subject to condition that the Applicant will not create any third party rights and will not part with possession of the suit flat till the further orders. [ A.S.OKA, J ]

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2565 OF 2011 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.1378 OF 2011 ............................................................. Office Notes,Office memorandum of Coram, appearances,Court's Court's or orders or directions Judge's orders & Registrar's orders. ............................................................. Mr.Sachin Chavan i/b Mr.S.S.Kulkarni for the Applicant Mr.Pramod Pawar for the respondent CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 23,2011 P.C.: 1 Time is sought by the contesting respondent. Stand over till 16th November 2011. Ad-interim relief granted on 27th July 2011 will continue to operate till further orders. JUDGE ssp

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2565 OF 2011 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.1378 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Court's Court's or Judge's orders. Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Mr. Sachin Chavan i/b Mr. S.S. Kulkarni for the Applicant. Mr. Pramodh Pawar for Respondent. CORAM : K.K.TATED,J. DATE : 20/12/2011. PC: Heard learned counsel for the parties. This application is preferred by the original defendant for stay of the judgment and decree dated 22nd December, 2010 passed by the Civil Judge Senior Division, Pune in Special Civil Suit No.1808 of 2007 and for injunction restraining respondents from obstructing, interfering and/or in any other manner disturbing the peaceful possession and occupation of the applicant in respect of the suit property described in paragraph 1 of the plaint. This court on 27th July, 2011 granted ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a). Both the counsel state that ad-interim relief granted on 27th July, 2011 may be continued till the hearing and final disposal of the appeal. By consent, ad-interim granted on 27th July, 2011 is confirmed, same to be continued till the hearing and final disposal of the appeal. Civil Application is disposed of accordingly. (K.K.TATED, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1257 OF 2017 Ramesh Bhimrao Dubale Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr.Rahul Kadam, i/b Mr.Mr.M.J.Pathan, for the Applicant. Mr.S. H. Yadav, A.P.P for the Respondent-State CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 20th JUNE, 2017 P.C. : Heard learned counsel for the parties. By this application, the Applicant seeks his enlargement on bail in connection with C.R.No.94 of 2016 registered with the Samarth Police Station, Pune for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 3, 4 and 7 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned Counsel for the applicant states that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the said case. He submitted that the applicant was about 18 years at the relevant time. 4. Learned APP opposed the application. Perused the papers. The complainant is the mother of the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix was about 5 years of age at the relevant time. She has stated that the applicant took her to his house and committed forcible intercourse with her. The incident has taken place on 25th May, 2016 at about 11.00 a.m. and the FIR was lodged on 27th May, 2016. The medical history given to the Doctor is consistent with the prosecutrix's statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The opinion of the medical doctor shows that there was evidence of torn hymen with peritymenal inflammation which is suggestive of vaginal penetration with no evidence of any injury on any part of the body. Considering the material on record, prima-facie, this is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on bail. Hence, the Application for bail is rejected and disposed of as such. However, the trial of the applicant is expedited keeping in mind the age of the prosecutrix and not the age of the applicant. It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima facie for deciding the aforesaid application, and the learned Judge shall decide the case on its own merits, in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. (REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2057 OF 2014 Shrikant Hanmant Bijargi … Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra … Respondent Through post. None for petitioner. Ms. M. H. Mhatre, APP for Respondent-State. CORAM : S. S. SHINDE & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : JUNE 09, 2022 P.C. : . We appoint Advocate Mr. Pranot P. Pawar to represent the petitioner in the petition. Issue notice to the respondent. Ms. Mhatre, learned APP waives service of notice for the respondent and prays for three weeks' time to procure the instructions. At her request, stand over to 06.07.2022. Registry shall handover the complete set of papers to the appointed Advocate Mr. Pranot P. Pawar on or before 27.06.2022. (MILIND N. JADHAV, J.) (S. S. SHINDE, J.) Minal Parab

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2057 OF 2014 Shrikant Hanmant Bijargi … Petitioner V/s. The State Of Maharashtra. … Respondent None for Petitioner. Mr. H. J. Dedhia APP, for Respondent-State. CORAM : A.S. GADKARI AND MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : 28 th SEPTEMBER, 2022. P.C. : At the request of learned APP, stand over to 30th September, 2022. [MILIND N. JADHAV, J.] [A.S. GADKARI, J.]

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. WRIT PETITION NO. 2057 OF 2014 Shrikant Hanmant Bijargi ....PETITIONER V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT None for the Petitioner. Mr. H.J.Dedhia, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE A.S. GADKARI & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ DATE : 30th September, 2022 P.C. : At the request of the learned APP for the Respondent - State, S.O. to 07/10/2022 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2057 OF 2014 Shrikant Hanmant Bijargi … Petitioner V/s. The State Of Maharashtra … Respondent Mr. Shashikant P. Chaudhari a/w Mr. Pranot P. Pawar Appointed Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. Ajay Patil APP, for Respondent-State. CORAM : A.S. GADKARI AND MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : 7 th OCTOBER, 2022. P.C. : Learned APP on instructions from Jailor (Grade-I), Yerwada Central Prison, Pune submitted that, Petitioner expired on 6th May, 2017 while undergoing treatment at J. J. Hospital, Mumbai. In view thereof, present Petition is abated and accordingly disposed off. [MILIND N. JADHAV, J.] [A.S. GADKARI, J.]

Order - Status 8: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.210 OF 2005 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, office : Court's or Judge's orders Memoranda of Coram, : appearances, Court's : orders or directions : and Registrar's orders : ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.Rajesh More, APP, for the State. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATED : 5th June, 2007. P.C. :- . Await service. S.O. for six weeks. In the meantime, the learned Advocate for the petitioner to serve respondent Nos.7 & 8 by Advocate's notice either personally or through Courier/Speed Post/E-mail/Fax and file an affidavit of service before the returnable date, failing which the Revision shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Court. (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)

Order - Status 12: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE. CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 210 OF 2005 ------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes,Office : Memoranda of Coram, : Court's or Judge's orders appearances,Court 's : orders or directions : and Registrar's orders. : ------------------------------------------------------------ A.G.Toraskar for the applicant. Ms.M.M.Deshmukh, APP for the State. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. DATED: 17th July 2007. P.C.: ---- . By way of last chance, one week time is granted to comply with the order dated 5th June, 2007, failing which, revision shall stand automatically dismissed without further reference to the Court. JUDGE

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.640 OF 2018 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.575 OF 2018 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.149 OF 2015 Motorola Solutions Inc. (Formerly Known as Motorola Inc.) ... Applicant V/s. Iridium India Telecom Limited & Ors. ... Respondents ..... Mr.Subodh Desai i/b. Bachubhai Munim & Co., Advocate for the Applicant. Ms.Anamika Malhotra, APP for the Respondent/State. CORAM : A.M.BADAR J. .... DATED : 5th JUNE 2018. P.C. : 1 Mr.Subodh Desai, the learned Counsel appearing for the applicant submits that though the main application is under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code and though the assignment is with the Honourable Shri.Justice P.D.Naik, there is standing Order to the effect that his matter may not be listed before the Honourable Shri.Justice P.D.Naik. 2 Registry to verify and report by 3.00 p.m. (A.M.BADAR J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.640 OF 2018 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.575 OF 2018 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.149 OF 2015 Motorola Solutions Inc. (Formerly Known as Motorola Inc.) ... Applicant V/s. Iridium India Telecom Limited & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.Subodh Desai i/b. Bachubhai Munim & Co., Advocate for the Applicant. ..... Mr.Vineet Unnikrishnan i/b. Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, Advocate for the Respondent No.1. Mr.Ativ Patel i/b. AVP Partners, Advocate for the Respondent Nos.3 to 19. .... Ms.Anamika Malhotra, APP for the Respondent/State. CORAM : A.M.BADAR J. DATED : 5th JUNE 2018. P.C. : 1 Shri.Subodh Desai, the learned Counsel appearing for the applicant has placed on record the modified consent terms, which are marked as Exhibit 'Y' for the purpose of identification. 2 Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the applicant as well as the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents. 3 They are unanimous in stating that the Court may modify the Order dated 25th February 2015 passed in Criminal Application No.149 of 2015 so as to read in it the modified consent terms dated 3rd May 2018 and more particularly clause 18(ii) thereof. 4 As all parties to the application are unanimous in getting the Order dated 25th February 2015 passed by this Court in Criminal Application No.149 of 2015 modified, the following Order : ORDER i) Clause (iv) of paragraph 2 of the Order dated 25th February 2016 is modified in the following manner : "(iv)The Criminal Complaint pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Khadki shall stand quashed upon payment being made in terms of clause 18(ii) of the modified consent terms at Exhibit 'Y'." ii) The application is accordingly disposed of. (A.M.BADAR J.)

Order - Status 8: 901-APPP-640-2018-575-2018-149-2018.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.640 OF 2018 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.575 OF 2018 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.149 OF 2015 MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS INC. (FORMERLY ) KNOWN AS MOTOROLA INC. )...APPLICANT V/S. IRIDIUM INDIA TELECOM LIMITED & ORS. )...RESPONDENTS Mr.Subodh Desai i/b. Bachubhai Munim & Co., for the Applicant. Ms.Anamika Malhotra, APP for the Respondent State. CORAM : A. M. BADAR, J. DATE : 15th JUNE 2018 P.C. : 1 Motion is made by the Registry for Speaking to Minutes of the order dated 5th June 2018. 2 Parties by their respective counsel. It is seen that inadvertently typographical mistake crept in Clause (1) of avk 1/2 paragraph 4 of the order dated 5th June 2018. Date " 25th February 2016" is typed thereat instead of the date " 25th February 2015 ." Hence, date in Clause (1) of paragraph 4 be corrected as "25th February 2015". With this, motion stands disposed of. (A. M. BADAR, J.)

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. APPLICATION IN APPLICATION NO. 640 OF 2018 In CR. APPLICATION IN APPLICATION 575 OF 2018 Motorola Solutions Inc (formerly Known As Motorola Inc) ....Applicant V/S Iridium India Telecom Limited And Ors ....Respondent Mr.Subodh Desai i/b. Bachubhai Munim And Company For Applicant Ms.Anamika Malhotra, APP for state CORAM : A.M. BADAR, J DATE : 20th June, 2018 P.C. : Wrongly placed on board. Remove from board. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2431 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.1529 OF 2009 Krishna Tukaram Shete Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & ors. Respondents Shri L.M.Acharya, advocate for applicant. Smt. G.P.Mulekar, AGP for respondents. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND A.A.SAYED, JJ DATED:- JULY 16, 2010 P.C. Considering issue raised in this application, we think it appropriate that reply ought to have been filed on behalf of the State of Maharashtra, respondent herein. Learned AGP seeks time to file reply within two weeks from today. Accordingly list this application on 30th July, 2010. Advance copy of the reply affidavit be made over to the Counsel for the Applicant. (A.A.SAYED, J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2431 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4071 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.1529 OF 2009 ...... Krishna Tukaram Shete ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.R.S.Shekhawat i/b Mr.L.M.Acharya for Applicant. Mrs.G.P.Mulekar, A.G.P. for Respondents. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND A.A.SAYED, JJ. DATED:- AUGUST 5, 2010. P.C. Request for adjournment is made at the instance of Applicant on the ground that the Advocate on record is out of station. No leave note has been filed. In such situation, the matter ought to proceed. However, by way of indulgence, we defer the hearing of this matter to 16th August 2010. It is made clear that no request for adjournment or keeping back the matter at the instance of Applicant shall be entertained on the next date of hearing. (A.A.SAYED, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2431 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.1529 OF 2009 . Mr.Krishna Shete .. Applicant v/s. The State of Maharashtra & Others ..Respondents Mr.L.M.Acharya, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr.A.R.Patil, AGP for the Respondents CORAM : B.H.MARLAPALLE & R.Y.GANOO, JJ. DATED : 19th November , 2010 P.C. : The applicant had filed Special Civil Suit No.157 of 2005 claiming recovery of interest on the award amount of Rs.51,16,492/- and the said suit has been decreed for a total sum of Rs.92,78,008/- which amount has been already deposited by the State Government as directed in First Appeal No.1529 of 2009 which impugns the said decree. By this application, the plaintiff prays for leave to withdraw the amount deposited by the State Government and in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we are not inclined to allow this application. Admittedly, the acquired land admeasuring about 4766.76 sq. meters located within the municipal area of Bhor, District-Pune was reserved in the development plan for the Forest Office and Nursery and its possession was taken over on 28.1.1983. The award came to be passed on or about 7.4.1998 determining the compensation payable to the plaintiff at Rs.51,16,492/- and the said amount has been paid to the plaintiff on 30.9.1998. While allowing the Special Suit by the impugned decree dated 18.4.2009, the trial court has granted simple interest at 9% on the award amount from 7.4.1998 to 30.9.1998, with which we do not find any fault atleast at this stage. However, interest has been granted at 8% per annum on Rs.51,16,492/- w.e.f. 28.1.1993 to 7.4.1998 and from 7.4.1998 to 5.1.2009 further interest has been awarded at 6% per annum. As noted earlier the amount deposited by the Government has been invested in a fixed deposit with a nationalised bank for a period of three years and even if we may not prima facie find fault in awarding interest of Rs.2,21,972/- for the period from 7.4.1998 to 13.9.1998, we are not inclined at this stage to disturb the investment. At the best First Appeal No.1529 of 2009 can be heard and decided expeditiously. The learned Counsel for the plaintiff will submit private paper book within four weeks and as soon as the appeal is ready for final hearing will take out a motion for fixing the date. Hence the stay application is rejected. [R.Y.GANOO, J.] [B.H.MARLAPALLE, J.]