All Civil Miscellaneous Application

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.254 OF 2015 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL (ST) NO.14544 OF 2015 Sou. Neha Abhijit Mangudkar Applicant. V/s. Abhijit Bharat Mangudkar Respondent. Mr.S.S. Deshmukh for the applicant. None for the respondent. CORAM : CORAM : V.M.KANADE AND MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ. JJ. DATED : 24TH AUGUST, 2016 P.C. :- Issue notice to the respondent, returnable on 21st September, 2016. (MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI, J.) (V.M.KANADE, J.)

Order - Status 6: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION C.A.M. NO.254 OF 2015 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL ST. NO.14544 OF 2015 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 : AJIT N. MARE, REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 8th September, 2016 S.O. 1 week for supplying copy. ­ sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 08.09.16

Order - Status 7: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION C.A.M. NO.254 OF 2015 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL ST. NO.14544 OF 2015 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 : AJIT N. MARE, REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 29th September, 2016 Stand over 1 week for furnishing copies. ­ sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 29.09.16

Order - Status 9: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION C.A.M. NO.254 OF 2015 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL ST. NO.14544 OF 2015 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 : AJIT N. MARE, REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 26th October, 2016 Returnable date is extended by 8 weeks. ­ sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 26.10.16

Order - Status 10: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION C.A.M. NO.254 OF 2015 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.14544 OF 2015 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 : AJIT N. MARE, REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 21st December, 2016 Await Service for 5 weeks. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 21.12.16

Order - Status 14: (CAM 254 OF 2015) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION No. 254 OF 2015 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL (ST.) No. 14544 OF 2015 Sou. Neha Abhijit Mangudkar Applicant/Appellant Vs. Mr. Abhijit Bharat Mangudkar Respondent *********** Mr. Shrishailay S. Deshmukh for the Applicant/Appellant Mr. Dhananjay Patil for Respondent. *********** CORAM : V.M. KANADE & P.R. BORA, JJ DATE : FEBRUARY 06, 2017 P.C. : Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant and the learned counsel for the Respondent. The application is filed for condonation of delay. There is a delay of 20 days in filing the Family Court Appeal, which is filed against the order passed by the Family Court. The Applicant has vat stated in her civil application that it took time for her to send the papers to her advocate and, therefore, the delay was caused in filing the FCA. On the other hand, a detailed affidavit in reply has been filed on behalf of the Respondent. Firstly, it is submitted that the valuable right has accrued in favour of the Respondent after the period of limitation is over. Secondly, it is submitted that there is an unexplained delay of 22 days and not 20 days. Thirdly, it is submitted that so far as the averment regarding the relatives of the Applicant were trying for amicable settlement of the present matrimonial matter is concerned, the said averment is false and no settlement talks have been taken place. Several other grounds have been taken in the reply. It is also pointed out that the Petitioner had remained absent on number of days before the Family Court and lastly, it is submitted that the Applicant is harassing the Respondent by filing civil applications and the petition for divorce filed by the Respondent before the Family Court is now at the last stage. It is submitted that on all these grounds, the civil application filed for condonation of delay may not be allowed. It is a settled position in law that if a plausible explanation is given by the Applicant, who is exercising his/her statutory right of appeal, then this Court shall exercise its discretionary power and condone the delay caused in filing the appeal. In the present case, there is a only delay of 20 days and the Applicant has a right to be heard on merits. Ultimately, while hearing the Applicant and the Respondent, this Court may consider the various submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent. So far (CAM 254 OF 2015) as the delay is concerned, we are inclined to condone the delay of 20 days. Hence, civil application filed for condonation of delay is allowed and disposed of in terms of prayer clause (a). Place the Family Court Appeal on the admission board on 20.2.2017 [ P.R. BORA, J.] [ V.M. KANADE, J.] Vaishali Tikam

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.190 OF 2018 ..... .... The State of Maharashtra ... Applicant V/s. Shri.Mithun Balaso Sawant & Anr. ... Respondents Mr.S.V.Gavand, APP for the Applicant/State. CORAM : A.M.BADAR J. DATED : 20th JULY 2018. P.C. : 1 Issue notice to respondents returnable on 14th September 2018. (A.M.BADAR J.)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.190 OF 2018 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA )...APPLICANT V/s. MITHUN BALASO SAWANT AND ANR. )...RESPONDENTS Mrs.M.R.Tidke, APP for the Applicant – State. Mr.Sharad Mulik, Advocate for the Respondent State. CORAM : A. M. BADAR, J. DATE : 15th OCTOBER 2018 P.C. : 1 This is an application for condonation of delay in preferring an application for leave to appeal. What is sought to be challenged is acquittal of the respondents in Special Case registered under the Prevention of Corruption Act. 2 Heard the learned APP appearing for the State as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. He argued that carelessness of the State is reflected from the fact that neither the name of the court nor the other particulars are properly mentioned in the instant application. The same is therefore liable to be rejected. 3 I have considered the submissions so advanced. The delay occurred is that of 21 days. Leaving apart the misdescription of the court and other particulars in the application, sufficient cause is shown for the short delay of 21 days in filing the application for leave to appeal. Hence, the order : ORDER i) The application is allowed. ii) The delay in filing the application for leave to appeal is condoned. iii) The application is accordingly disposed off. (A. M. BADAR, J.)

Order - Status 5: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPW) NO. 274 OF 2015 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 3464 OF 2013 Office Notes, Office Memorandam of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders None for Applicant Ms. Saloni M. Ghule, I/by Sanjiv Sawant for R. No. 1 Mr. Deepak Thakare, APP for State CORAM : A. S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 22nd APRIL, 2016 P.C. None for the applicant. 2] This is an application for early hearing of Writ Petition No. 3464/2013 preferred by the original petitioner. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitionerhusband on instructions submitted that in pursuance of the order dated 26.3.2013 her client is regularly paying the maintenance of Rs. 10,000/ to the applicantwife. 3] In view of the same, I find that there is no urgency in hearing the petition expeditiously. The application is disposed off with liberty to the applicantwife to file fresh application for appropriate reliefs, if the petitionerhusband commits any breach of orders dated 13.9.2013 and 17.6.2014. 4] The application is disposed off in the aforesaid terms. (A. S. GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 8: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 309 OF 2015 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. Mr. J.G. Reddy, for applicant. Ms. S.S. Kaushik, APP for State. CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 10th December 2015 P.C.: The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the connected application bearing no.310 of 2015 is placed for hearing on 6th January 2016 and requests that the present application may also be tagged along with it. At his request, stand over to 6th January 2015. (A.S. GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. APPLICATION NO. 310 OF 2015 Mohammed Ishtiaque Ebrahim Bagban ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Anr ....Respondent WITH CR. APPLICATION NO. 309 OF 2015 Mohammed Ishtiaque Ebrahim Bagban ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Anr ....Respondent Mr. Jagdish G. Reddy For Applicant Mrs. A.A. Takalkar,APP for state CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J DATE : 18th January, 2018 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the applicant, Stand over to 25/01/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 118 OF 2015 Mr. Amit Dipak Nachankar ....Appellant V/S Mrs. Rakhee Amit Nachankar ....Respondent WITH CIVIL APPLICATION IN FCA NO. 140 OF 2017 In FAMILY COURT APPEAL 118 OF 2015 Smt.rakhee Amit Nachankar Alias Rakhee Shrikrishna Moharir ....Applicant V/S Shri.amit Deepak Nachankar ....Respondent Ms Shaila Mukesh Joshi For Appellant Shri Vaibhav Prakash Patankar For Respondent For Respondent CORAM : R.M. SAVANT. & SMT. S.S. JADHAV, JJ DATE : 3rd July, 2017 P.C. : Stand over to 10/07/2017. To be listed under caption "For Settlement/Filing Consent Terms". ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 118 OF 2015 Mr. Amit Dipak Nachankar ....Appellant V/S Mrs. Rakhee Amit Nachankar ....Respondent WITH CIVIL APPLICATION IN FCA NO. 140 OF 2017 In FAMILY COURT APPEAL 118 OF 2015 Smt.rakhee Amit Nachankar Alias Rakhee Shrikrishna Moharir ....Applicant V/S Shri.amit Deepak Nachankar ....Respondent Ms Shaila Mukesh Joshi For Appellant Shri Vaibhav Prakash Patankar For Respondent For Respondent CORAM : R.M. SAVANT. & SMT. S.S. JADHAV, JJ DATE : 10th July, 2017 P.C. : By consent Stand over to 14/08/2017 with liberty to move preceipe if occasion so arises. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: (903)-CAM-140-17.doc*.* IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.140 OF 2017 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.118 OF 2015 Smt. Rakhee Amit Nachankar alias Rakhee Shrikrishna Moharir Applicant IN THE MATTER BETWEEN Appellant Respondent Shri. S. C. Wakankar i/by Shri. Vaibhav P. Patankar for the Applicant/ Respondent. Ms. Shaila M. Joshi for the Appellant/Respondent. CORAM : R. M. SAVANT & SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, JJ DATE : 19th JULY, 2017 P.C. The above Civil Application has been filed seeking withdrawal of the amount of Rs.5,00,000/ deposited in this Court by the original Appellant/husband. The Learned Counsel appearing for the original Appellant/husband has no objection to the said withdrawal. The Civil Application is accordingly allowed and made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). The Civil Application is accordingly disposed of. [SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J] [R.M.SAVANT, J]

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.93 OF 2012 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's Orders Mr.Sudhir Sakpal h/f.Mr.S.M.Suryawanshi for the Applicant. Ms.V.R.Bhosale, APP for the State/R2. CORAM: R.G.KETKAR, J. DATE : 2nd March, 2012. P.C.: Heard learned counsel for the Applicant and the learned APP for Respondent No.2/State. Issue notice to Respondent No.1, returnable after four weeks. (R.G.KETKAR, J.)

Order - Status 14: Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.93 OF 2012 M/s. Lalit Construction .Applicant V/s. Rakesh Roshan & anr. .Respondents None for the Applicant Mr.Y.M.Nakhawa, APP, for Respondent No.2 - State CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATE : 12TH JUNE, 2012 P.C. . None for the applicant even on second call. Criminal Application is dismissed for want of prosecution. (R.C.CHAVAN, J.)

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2853 OF 2010 Suresh Sitaram Dolas ...Applicant vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr. &..Respondents ----- Ms.A.Ashtivhar i/b. Mr.R. Sathyanarayanan for Applicant Mrs.R.V. Newton -APP for State ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 1ST JULY, 2010 P.C. Heard the learned Counsel for the Applicant. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant submits that after the complaint was dismissed by the Learned Magistrate by his order dated 6.11.2006, the Learned Magistrate has thereafter passed a second order in the said complaint referring the matter for enquiry under section 202 of the Cr.P.C. to the Byculla Police Station. It is submitted that the complaint having been dismissed, a subsequent order in the same complaint could not have been passed by the Learned Magistrate. In my view, prima facie case is made out for grant of ad-interim relief. Issue notice to the Respondent No.2, returnable after four weeks. In the meantime, there shall be ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (b). (V.M. KANADE J.)

Order - Status 20: 1 Cri-A-2853-10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2853 OF 2010 Suresh Sitaram Dolas ... Applicant vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. ... Respondents Mr. R.Sathyanarayanan, Advocate, for the applicant Ms. M.R.Tidke,Advocate for the respondent No.1 - State. Mr. R.A.Shelke, i/b. Shri Gautam Kanchanpurkar, Advocate, for respondent No.2. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 29th April, 2011. P.C. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Perused both the orders passed by the Magistrate. By first order dated 6.11.2006, he had rejected the complaint as premature with liberty to the complainant to file fresh complaint as and when cause of action arose. However, by second order dated 17.2.2007, he allowed the same old complaint to be revived and issued the process. The second order is challenged in the present application. After some discussion, with consent of the learned Counsel, the order dated 17.2.2007 is hereby set aside with liberty to the respondent No.2 Mhi 2 Cri-A-2853-10.sxw complainant to file fresh complaint, if he so desires. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)

Order - Status 7: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPLICATION No.2346 of 2007 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Office : Notes,Office Court or Judge's Order. Memorandum : of Coram apperance,Court's : Orders: & Directions and: Registrar's Order. : -------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr Murtuza Nazmi, Advocate for the Applicant. Ms M.H. Mhatre, APP for the Respondent. CORAM: V.C. DAGA,J. DATED: 13TH SEPT, 2007. 1.Heard. 2.By consent of parties, the amount of bail ordered earlier is reduced from Rs.30,000/- to Rs.10,000/-. 3.To that extent order of bail is modified. (V.C.DAGA,J.)