All Cases

Order - Status 2: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION STAMP NO. 15223 OF 2018 Tetra Park India Pvt. Ltd. ....Petitioner V/S The Union Of India And Ors. ....Respondent Mr Prakash Shah i/b Pds Legal For CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & SMT. BHARATI HARISH DANGRE, JJ DATE : 4th June, 2018 P.C. : Mentioned at 11.00 a,m, Place the matter on board for urgent admission on 11/06/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6151 OF 2018 Tetra Park India Pvt. Ltd. ....Petitioner V/S The Union Of India And Ors. ....Respondent Mr Prakash Shah, i/b Pds Legal For Petitioner Mr Pradeep S.Jetly a/w D.P.Singh for Respdt. CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & SMT. BHARATI HARISH DANGRE, JJ DATE : 11th June, 2018 P.C. : Stand over to 12/06/2018 at 3.00 p.m,. Mr Jetly has tendered affidavit in Court is kept in matter. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6151 OF 2018 Tetra Pak India Pvt. Ltd. } Petitioner versus The Union of India and Ors. } Respondents Mr. Prakash Shah i/b. M/s. PDS Legal for the petitioner. Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly with Mr. D. P. Singh for respondent nos. 1 to 3. CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, JJ. DATE :- JUNE 12, 2018 P.C. :- After this writ petition was heard on the earlier occasion and even today, Mr. Jetly, on seeking instructions from the Joint Director General, Foreign Trade, who is also the deponent of the affidavit and present in court, states that the said Joint Director General will grant the petitioner the licences which are subject matter of the petition, namely, licence authorisation under the Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme (EPCGS) and the Merchandise Exports from India Scheme (MEIS) and allow the petitioner to avail of the benefits of the schemes, that of the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) 2015-2020. However, this is subject and without prejudice as well to the powers conferred in the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade/Directorate of Foreign Trade under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992. We accept these statements made on instructions by Mr.Jetly as undertakings given to this court. In the light thereof, we are of the opinion that once licences would be granted in pursuance of the petitioner's applications, then, the orders of rejection of these applications made earlier do not survive. They stand quashed and set aside. Needless to clarify that once the above statements are made on behalf of the Union of India, Ministry of Commerce and the Director General and the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, then, respondent no. 4-Commissioner of Customs, Nhava Sheva shall not preclude or prevent the clearance of the consignments of the petitioner provided the petitioner can seek the benefit of the licences. The communication dated 14th May, 2018 from the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Nhava Sheva Customs House Exhibit "II" to the petition to stand quashed and set aside. The writ petition is disposed of. (SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

Order - Status 8: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2008 OF 2016 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.1 OF 2013 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's orders Coram, Appearances, court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Mr.A.R.Patil, A.G.P. for the applicant CORAM : K. K. TATED, J DATE : AUGUST 14, 2019 P.C.: . Heard. 2 By this Civil Application, Applicant is seeking stay of the operation and implementation of the judgment and award dated 19.12.2011 passed by Reference Court in L.A.R.No.295 of 2003 holding that Respondent original Claimants are entitled sum of Rs.1,49,085/- by way of additional compensation in respect of acquired land. 3 The learned A.G.P. submits that in the present proceedings, Special Land Acquisition Officer issued notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, dated 16.7.1998 for acquiring Respondent's land admeasuring 0H. 39R. land from Gut no.52 situated at village Sheri Digar, Taluka Kalwan, District Nashik for the purpose of construction of Sule Unai Submergence Project. 4 The learned A.G.P. submits that after following due process of law, Special Land Acquisition Officer declared award under section 11 of the said Act dated 15.11.2000 holding that Respondent original Claimants are entitled compensation in respect of acquired land @ Rs.27,197/- per Hector. 5 The learned A.G.P. submits that, being aggrieved by the said award, Respondent original Claimant preferred reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. In the said Reference, Reference Court awarded enhanced compensation in respect of acquired land @ Rs.2,50,000/- per Hector and also claimed Rs.2.0 lac towards compensation of Mango and Jambhul trees. He submits that Reference Court without considering the evidence on record, particularly sale instance, held that Claimants are entitled additional compensation of Rs.1,49,085/-. 6 The learned A.G.P. submits that they have good chance of success in the present proceeding. He submits that if entire compensation is recovered by Respondent original Claimant by filing execution Application, then nothing will survive in the present proceeding. He submits that pending the hearing and final disposal of the First Appeal, this Hon'ble court be pleased to stay the operation and implementation of the impugned judgment and award. 7 Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Applicant and the impugned judgment and award passed by Reference Court holding that Claimants are entitled additional compensation of Rs.1,49,085/- I am satisfied that the Applicant has made out a case for allowing the Civil Application, but they have to deposit entire awarded amount with interest in the Reference Court on or before 19.10.2019 failing which the Civil Application shall stand dismissed without referring back to the court. Hence, following order is passed: a. Operation and implementation of the impugned judgment and award dated 19.12.2011 passed by Reference Court in LAR No. 295 of 2003 is stayed till the hearing and final disposal of the First Appeal, on condition that Applicant to deposit entire awarded amount with interest in the Reference Court on or before 19.10.2019, failing which Civil Applications shall stand dismissed without referring back to the court. b. Reference court is directed to invest the said amount in fixed deposit of any nationalized bank initially for a period of one year and same be continued till further orders. c. Liberty granted to the Respondents/Claimants to prefer an appropriate Application for withdrawal of amount, if they so desire, which will be decided on its own merits. d. Civil Application stands disposed of accordingly. e. No order as to costs. (K.K.TATED, J.)

Order - Status 9: ssm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5617 OF 2008 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Court's or Judge's Orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr.C.G.Gavnekar for the Petitioners. Mr.R.D.Soni i/by M/s.Ram & Company for Respondent No.2. CORAM : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. DATED : 21st November, 2008. P.C. . The Petitioners have challenged the impugned order dated 24/04/2008 whereby, on application filed by Defendant Nos. 1 to 5 and 17 to 20, basically contending that before hearing of the Application Exhibit 5, it is necessary to consider the aspect of deficit in stamp as per Bombay Stamp Act. There is no dispute that the appeal against the said injunction order is also dismissed. The learned Judge, therefore, while deciding this application clearly observed that the parties are at liberty to raise this point while leading the evidence and at the time of hearing of the suit. In view of this, I see there is no reason to interfere with the said order. The intention with regard to the deficiency and as contemplated under Section 34 of the Bombay Stamp Act need to be considered at the earliest by the Trial Court. However, for grant of injunction/relief that may be one of the facet, but that itself cannot be the reason not to consider the application at this stage of the proceedings. There is no dispute that while passing the injunction order at Exhibit 5, there is always various facets which court consider to grant interim order. The validity or deficiency of stamp is a matter which can be gone into at the appropriate stage of the proceedings. Court cannot decline any interim relief on this ground. In view of this keeping all points open, the present Writ Petition is dismissed. . No costs. [ ANOOP V.MOHTA,J.]

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO. 5825 of 2007 ------------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of : Coram,appearances,Court's Orders : Court's or Judges order or directions and Registrar Orders : ------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.Amit Borkar for the petitioner. CORAM : S.B. MHASE & D.G. KARNIK, JJ. DATED : 10th August 2007. P.C:- . Notice returnable after four weeks. Hamdast allowed. (D.G.KARNIK, J) (S.B.MHASE, J)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5481 OF 2006. Mr.Prashant Tukaram Kshirsagar. ... Petitioner. V/s. Mrs.Meenakshi Prashant Kshirsagar. ... Respondent. Uday P. Warunjikar for the petitioner. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. DATED: 21st September 2006. P.C.: . Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. . Perused petition. On the motion made by learned counsel for the petitioner, petitioner is permitted to withdraw this petition. During the course of hearing and from the impugned order, it appears that lot many interim applications are pending for adjudication before the Family Court. It is, therefore, necessary to indicate that before implementing the impugned order, the Family Court shall dispose of all the pending applications; after hearing the parties; as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. All these applications may be disposed of either by common order or by separate orders, based on common hearing, as the Family Court may deem fit in exercise of its own discretion. With the aforesaid directions, petition is dismissed as withdrawn with no order as to costs. (V.C.DAGA, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 998 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.16135 OF 2017 Balu Waman Alhat …Applicant Versus Union of India through the General Manager …Respondents Mr.Kuldip Singh for the applicant. CORAM : PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J. DATE : 7 th MARCH 2019. P.C. : Issue notice to respondents, returnable on 22nd March 2019. In addition to the regular mode, the applicant is permitted to serve through other modes as are permissible in law and file affidavit of service accordingly. [PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J.]

Order - Status 7: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.998 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16135 OF 2017 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 : 19th March, 2019 Returnable date is extended by 6 weeks. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 19.03.19

Order - Status 9: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.998 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16135 OF 2017 Mr. Balu Waman Alhat ...Applicant Versus Union of India Through The General Manager ...Respondent ...... None for the Applicant. ...... CORAM : K.K.TATED, J. DATED : AUGUST 29th, 2019 P.C. 1 None for the Applicant. By this Civil Application, Applicant/Claimant is seeking condonation of 647 days delay in filing First Appeal, challenging the Judgment and Award dated 16th April 2015 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal Mumbai in Original Application No. OA 1044 of 2010. When the matter is called out, no one appeared on behalf of the Applicant hence, dismissed for non prosecution. (K.K.TATED, J.) 1/1

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1900 OF 2021 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 152 OF 2021 Deepak Madhvan ...Applicant Versus Wilson Charles Wakde and Anr. ...Respondents None for the Applicant. Mr. S.V.Gavand, A.P.P for the Respondent-State. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 3rd AUGUST, 2021 P.C. : None appears for the applicant. Stand over to 4th August, 2021. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 6: 27-IA-1900-2021.doc SHAGUFTA Q PATHAN Digitally signed by SHAGUFTA Q PATHAN Date: 2021.08.06 11:05:19 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1900 OF 2021 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.152 OF 2021 Deepak Madhvan ...Applicant Versus Wilson Charles Wakde & Anr. ...Respondents None for the Applicant None for the Respondent No. 1 Mr. A. D. Kamkhedkar, A.P.P for the Respondent No.2–State CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. WEDNESDAY, 4th AUGUST 2021 P.C. : 1 None appeared for the applicant at the first as well as at the second call. Stand over to 11th August 2021. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 8: RUPALI RAJESH WAKODIKAR Digitally signed by RUPALI RAJESH WAKODIKAR Date: 2021.08.12 16:54:57 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1900 OF 2021 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 152 OF 2021 Deepak Madhvan ...Applicant Versus Wilson Charles Wakde State of Maharashtra ...Respondents Mr. P.V.Satam i/b Mr. Vikas Mishra for the Applicant. Mr. A.R.Patil, A.P.P for the Respondent No.2-State. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 11th AUGUST, 2021 P.C. : Heard learned Counsel for the Applicant. By this applicant, the Applicant seeks suspension of his sentence and enlargement on bail, pending the hearing and final disposal of his Revision Application. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Respondent No.2 (Original Complainant) had filed a complaint as against the Applicant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, in the year 2003. He submits that the amount involved in the dishonour of cheques was Rs.2,00,000/-. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that during the pendency of the case filed by the Respondent No.2 (Original Complainant), the Applicant handed over a piece of land by a Sale Deed to the Respondent No.2 in the year 2006. He submits that there is evidence on record to show that the said transfer was in lieu of the dishonour of cheques. He submits that even otherwise, the Applicant has without prejudice deposited Rs.1,50,000/- in the Appellate Court i.e. Sessions Court during the pendency of his appeal. The Applicant was on bail pending trial as well as in the Appellate Court. Having perused the evidence, the Applicant has made out a case for suspension of his sentence and enlargement of bail, pending the hearing and final disposal of his aforesaid Revision Application. Considering the aforesaid, the application is allowed and the Applicant's sentence is suspended and he is enlarged on bail, pending the hearing and final disposal of his appeal, on the following terms and conditions :- ORDER i) The Applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount; ii) The Applicant shall report to the trial Court, once in six months on the day/date specified by the trial Court, till his Revision Application is finally disposed of; iii) The Applicant shall keep the trial Court informed of his current address and mobile contact number and/or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time; Learned Counsel for the Applicant states that he will not file any application seeking withdrawal of the amount deposited by the Applicant, in the Appellate Court. Statement Accepted. The application is accordingly disposed of. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6025 OF 2007 ------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Order or Directions and Registrar's Orders ------------------------------------------------------------------- ¦ Court's or Judge's ¦ Orders ¦ ¦ Mr.Arshad Shaikh with Mr.R.M.Pethe for the petitioner. Mr.N.M. Ganaji for Respondent No.2. Mr.Farhan Dubash i/by Naik Naik Iyer & Co. for Respondent No.3. Mr.Vishal Kanade i/by M/s. V. Deshpande for Resp.No.4. CORAM: SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 21ST SEPT., 2007. P.C.: 1. Respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are represented by their respective advocates. 2. The advocate for the petitioner to take steps to serve respondent No.1 within four weeks from today. 3. S.O. for four weeks. $ldots ldots$

Order - Status 8: vss : 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6025 OF 2007 ------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda¦ Court's or Judge's of Coram, appearances, Court's¦ Orders Order or Directions and ¦ Registrar's Orders ¦ ------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.Arshad Shaikh with R.M. Pethe for the Petitioner Mr.Vishal Kanade for Respondent No.4 CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: OCTOBER 19, 2007 P.C.: . Mr.Pethe for the petitioner seeks leave to amend the cause title by substituting the address of Respondent No.1. Leave granted. Amendments to be carried out within a week from today. Issue fresh notice to Respondent NO.1 on the amended address returnable in four weeks.

Order - Status 11: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6025 OF 2007 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3063 OF 2007 ------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's Memoranda of Coram, orders appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders ------------------------------------------------------ Mr. R.M. Pethe for petitioner. Mr.N.M. Ganaji for respondent no.2. Mr. Farhan Dubash i/by Naik Naik Iyer and co. for respondent no.3. Mr. Vishal Kanade i/by M/s.V. Deshpande for respondent no.4. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE,J. 10/12/2007. P.C.: . Rule. . Respondent nos.2 to 4 waive service. . The learned Advocate for the petitioner is at liberty to serve the respondent no.1 by publishing a notice in an English daily published from Calcutta. The proof of such court within eight weeks. publication shall be placed before this . Rule be made returnable in the week commencing from 3rd March, 2008. . Civil Application No. 3063 of 2007 is disposed off accordingly. (B.H. Marlapalle,J.)

Order - Status 14: ISM 1.wp.6025.07.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6025 OF 2007 Saifuddin Karachiwala ….PETITIONER V/s. The Indian Standard Metal Company Limited, & others …..RESPONDENTS Mr. R.M. Pethe, Advocate for the Petitioner. None for Respondent. CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. DATE: JUNE 17, 2022. P.C.: On instructions, a motion is made by the Counsel for the petitioner for withdrawal of the Petition. Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn. If the prayer for withdrawal of the amount is made, same be considered in accordance with law. [NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.]