All Cases

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1170 OF 2017 Khalil Ahmad Salmani @ Chand ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 5th June, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned, 27/06/2017 Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1170 OF 2017 Khalil Ahmad Salmani @ Chand ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 13th July, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 31/07/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1170 OF 2017 Khalil Ahmad Salmani @ Chand ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 14th September, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time stand over to 29/09/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1170 OF 2017 Khalil Ahmad Salmani @ Chand ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 14th September, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time stand over to 29/09/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1170 OF 2017 Khalil Ahmad Salmani @Chand Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr.S.R.Gaud i/b Mr.M.R.Gowd, for the Applicant. Ms.P.P.Shinde, A.P.P for the Respondent-State. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 26th SEPTEMBER, 2017 P.C. : Not on board. Taken on board. At the outset, learned counsel for the applicant, on instructions of the instructing Advocate, seeks leave to withdraw this application. The Application is accordingly disposed of as withdrawn. It is made clear, that this application has not been heard on merits. (REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. 4379 of 2005 M/s. Raymond Ltd. .. Petitioners V/s. Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents Mr. V. Shreedharan with Mr. Prakash Shah with Mr. Bharat Raichandani i/b. Mr. Prakash D. Shah for the Petitioners Mr. R.V. Desai, Sr. Counsel with Mr. V.H. Kantharia for the Respondents CORAM : DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN & J.H. BHATIA, JJ. DATED : 20.07.2005. P.C.:- Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned counsel for the Respondents. Rule. The learned counsel for the Respondents waives service. It is made clear that this Petition is admitted only on the issue of "Res Judicata and Consequential Penalty" and it is also made clear that this Petition is not admitted on the main issue of "Valuation". Hearing expedited. (DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (J.H. BHATIA, J.)

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4379 OF 2005 AND WRIT PETITION NO.4516 OF 2005 M/s. Raymond Limited … Petitioner Vs. Union of India and others … Respondents Ms. Ginita Bodani i/b. Economic Laws Practice for Petitioner. Mr. J. B. Mishra for Respondents. CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : JANUARY 27, 2021 P.C. : Heard Ms. Bodani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents. It is seen that against the order-in-original bearing No.26/2001- Commissioner M-VI dated 09.10.2001, petitioner had filed appeal bearing No.E/3850/2001 before the Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Western Zonal Bench, Mumbai ('CESTAT' hereinafter). Again, assailing the order-in-original bearing No.27/2001- Commissioner M-VI dated 09.10.2001, petitioner had filed appeal bearing No.E/43/02 before the CESTAT. Against the order-in-original No.21/CEX/Commissioner/99 dated 19.05.2019, petitioner had filed yet another appeal before the CESTAT being E/2449/99. First two appeals pertained to the factories of the petitioner situated at Thane whereas the last mentioned appeal pertained to the factory situated at Chhindwara in the state of Madhya Pradesh. All the three appeals were heard together by the CESTAT and were disposed of by the common order dated 08.04.2005. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 08.04.2005, petitioner has preferred Writ Petition No.4379 of 2005 (A.S.) before this Court which is pending. In the meanwhile, CESTAT modified its order dated 08.04.2005 by subsequent order dated 20.06.2005. This subsequent order has been put to challenge by the petitioner before this Court in Writ Petition No.4516 of 2005 (A.S.). Both the matters are listed today on praecipe filed by learned counsel for the petitioner. It is submitted that Government of India has introduced the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (briefly 'the scheme' hereinafter) for settlement of central excise and service tax disputes which have since been subsumed under the goods and services tax (GST). Petitioner had submitted declaration in respect of the two orders-in-original dated 09.10.2001 pertaining to the factories at Thane. Additionally, petitioner filed declaration under the scheme in respect of the factory at Chhindwara before the designated committee at Chhindwara. In so far the declarations pertaining to Thane factories are concerned, it is submitted that designated committee, Thane has accepted the tax dues declared by the petitioner pursuant to which petitioner has paid the amount determined by the designed committee. However, in so far the declaration pertaining to Chhindwara factory is concerned, the tax dues determined by the designated committee is much in excess of the dues declared by the petitioner and, therefore, the same has been put to challenge by the petitioner before the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur Bench in Writ Petition No.7087 of 2020. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in so far the disputes pertaining to the orders-in-original both dated 09.10.2001 relatable to the factories at Thane are concerned, the matter has been settled and, therefore, in terms of the scheme, petitioner is required to withdraw the two writ petitions. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to the prayer made for withdrawal of the writ petitions. In view of the above, we allow withdrawal of the two writ petitions pertaining to the orders-in-original dated 09.10.2001 relating to the factories at Thane. Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of on withdrawal. Refund as per Rules. (MILIND N. JADHAV, J.) (UJJAL BHUYAN, J.) Minal Parab

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION No.4379 of 2005 WITH WRIT PETITION No.4516 OF 2007 M/s. Raymond Limited ...Petitioner Vs. Union of India and Ors. ...Respondents Ms. Gihita Bodani i/b. Economic Laws Practice for Petition in WP No.4379 of 2005 and WP 4516 of 2007 CORAM:- G. S.KULKARNI, J. RAJESH S. PATIL, J. DATE :- JUNE 9, 2023. P. C.: . Both the Petitions have already been disposed of by this Court, by an order dated 27th January, 2021. Hence removed form the board. (RAJESH S. PATIL, J.) ( G.S. KULKARNI, J. )

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.552 OF 2013 M/s.Neha Enterprises .. Appellants Versus Smt.Marubai Narayan Thakur and Ors. .. Respondents Mr.V.A.Thorat, Senior Advocate i/b. R.A.Thorat, Senior Advocate with Mr.Himanshu Kode i/b. Mr.S.A.Sawant for the appellants Mr.P.S.Dani i/b. Mr.Amol Patil for respondent Nos. 10A and 10B CORAM : S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. 13rd June 2013. P.C.: 1] When this appeal from order was listed for admission pursuant to the order of the learned Vacation Judge on private notice the contesting respondents 10A and 10B have appeared and Mr.Dani, learned Counsel states that Mr.Amol Patil, Advocate has instructions to appear for them and a caveat has also been filed on their behalf. He further states that he would file vakalatnama on their behalf within a week. 2] At the request of the caveators' Advocate and in order to enable him to file vakalatnama and take instructions, S.O. 26th June 2013. Ad-interim order to continue till 1st July 2013. (S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J)

Order - Status 9: mnm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION APEAL FROM ORDER NO. 552 OF 2013 M/s. Neha Enterprises Appellants Vs. Mrs. Marubai Narayan Thakur & Ors. Respondents Mr. V.A. Thorat, Sr. Advocate a/w. R.A. Thorat and S.A. Sawant for Appellants Mr. Ajay Patil for Respondent No.6 Mr. Rohit Sachdeo for Respondent Nos. 7 to 9 Mr. P.S. Dani i/b. A.B. Patil and D.D. Ausarkar for Respondent Nos. 10A and 10B CORAM : MRS. ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED : 1ST JULY, 2013 P.C. : The impugned order of the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Panvel dated 14th May, 2013 shows the setting out of the facts and arguments of the Advocates of the parties with regard to the main issue No. 1 in paragraphs 1 to 36 of the order. The issue which has been answered in paragraph 37 does not show the reasons for acceptance of the arguments of one party or rejection of arguments of the other. Both Counsel agree that the order cannot be sustained for want of reasons. Based upon the same facts and arguments the learned Judge would require to give his reasons for coming to the conclusion that he does. However both parties would be entitled to reargue the application under Exhibit42 on a single specified date of hearing upon which the learned Judge shall pass an order with reasons. The learned Judge shall fix a clear date in the month of July, 2013 for the aforesaid purpose. Consequently the impugned order is set aside. The interim order passed in this Appeal from Order shall continue until the disposal of Exhibit42 application by the learned Judge and two weeks thereafter. The Appeal from Order is disposed of accordingly. The civil application is also disposed of accordingly. (MRS. ROSHAN DALVI, J.)

Order - Status 4: Santosh IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2636 OF 2021 Rajshekhar Ambedkar ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & anr. …Respondents Mr. Samir A. Vaidya, for the Petitioner. Mrs. A. S. Pai, PP for the State/Respondent no.1. CORAM: S. S. SHINDE & N. J. JAMADAR, JJ DATED: 29th JULY, 2021 (Through V.C.) PC:- Heard Mr. Vaidya, the learned Counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Vaidya submits that after fling of this petition the petitioner has been served with an externment order. Mr. Vaidya seeks leave to amend the petition so as to challenge the externment order as well. Leave to amend. Necessary amendment be carried out within a period of one week and amended copy of the petition be served on the respondents. List on 17th August, 2021. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.] [S. S. SHINDE, J.]

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. WRIT PETITION NO. 2636 OF 2021 Rajshekhar Ambedkar ....PETITIONER V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S.S. SHINDE & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. J. JAMADAR, JJ DATE : 17th August, 2021 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 24/08/2021 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2636 OF 2021 Rajshekhar Ambedkar ...Petitioner vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents Mr. Deep Samant i/b. Mr. Samir Vaidya, for the Petitioner Smt. A.S. Pai, PP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : S. S. SHINDE & N. J. JAMADAR, JJ. DATE : AUGUST 24, 2021 P.C.: . At the request of Mr. Samant holding for Mr. Samir Vaidya, learned counsel for the petitioner, list on 3rd September, 2021 through video conference. (N. J. JAMADAR, J.) (S. S. SHINDE, J.) VISHAL SUBHASH PAREKAR Digitally signed by VISHAL SUBHASH PAREKAR Date: 2021.08.24 18:55:34 +0530

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. WRIT PETITION NO. 2636 OF 2021 Rajshekhar Ambedkar ....PETITIONER V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S.S. SHINDE & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. J. JAMADAR, JJ DATE : 3rd September, 2021 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 06/09/2021 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2636 OF 2021 Rajshekhar Ambedkar. … Petitioner. V/s. The State of Maharashtra and others. … Respondents. Mr.Samir Vaidya for the Petitioner. Ms.A.S.Pai, GP for Respondent No.1. CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR AND SARANG V. KOTWAL, JJ. DATE : 6 October 2021. P.C. : The learned counsel for the Petitioner has challenged the externment order dated 28 June 2021. At the outset, the learned Public Prosecutor raised an objection that the Petitioner has an alternate remedy of statutory appeal. The learned counsel for the Petitioner sought to contend that two externment orders back to back have been issued and there is serious violation of fundamental rights of the Petitioner of free movement. There is the sequetor of every externment order. A statutory remedy of appeal against the impugned order is provided. However, considering the arguments made by the Petitioner, in the facts of this case, we are inclined to accept the prayer of the Petitioner for early disposal of his appeal. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of by directing that if the Petitioner files an appeal within a period of three working days from today, the appeal will be decided by the Appellate Authority within a period of two weeks thereafter on is own merits. We make it clear that since we have disposed of the writ petition on the ground of alternate remedy, we have not gone into the merits of the matter. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) (NITIN JAMDAR, J.)

Order - Status 6: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1802 OF 2009 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. Mr.A.P.Mundargi with Mr.Vikas Shivarkar and Mr.Yogesh Pawar for the petitioner. Ms M.H. Mhatre, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : S.A. BOBDE, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 09, 2009. P.C.: Notice, returnable in two weeks. S.A. BOBDE, J.

Order - Status 19: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI. WRIT PETITION NO. 1802 OF 2009 Mr. Jagdish Mohanlal Joshi … Petitioner. V/s. Central Bureau of Investigation & Ors. … Respondents. Mr.K.T.S.Tulsi, Senior Counsel with Mr. Gaurav Bhargva, Mr.Lokesh Bhola & Mr.Vishu Anand i/by Omprakash Parihar for the Petitioner. Ms. Rebecca Gonsalves for the Respondent No.1. Ms. V. S. Mhaispurkar, APP for the State. CORAM : M.L.TAHALIYANI,J. DATE : 25 SEPTEMEBR, 2014 P.C. : 1 Heard. 2 In view of the earlier order of this court, releasing the passport of the Petitioner, the Petitioner does not press for any relief in this writ petition. 3 Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. However, liberty is given to the Petitioner to reagitate all the issues if the occasion arises. (JUDGE) …..

Order - Status 2: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 3: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 4: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 5: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 9: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.18470 OF 2022 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.434 OF 2002 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders CORAM : D.S. DESHMUKH REGISTRAR (JUDL II) : 26th September, 2022 DATE Advocate Irvin D'Souza Present on behalf of Shri S.B. Deshmukh, Advocate for the Applicant. Advocate for the Applicant has filed Interim Application to bring on record legal representatives of deceased Respondent No.1 viz. Shri Prakash Ramchandra Kulkarni. The Interim Application is filed in time as per relief granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No.3 of 2020. No objections raised by the otherside. Hence, Interim Application is allowed. Applicant to carry out necessary amendment in the title of Second Appeal within 2 weeks. Issue Notice to the newly added legal heirs of deceased Respondent No.1, returnable by 6 (six) weeks (excluding Diwali Vacation). sd/- Registrar (Judl II) dsm