All Cases

Order - Status 5: FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.4848 of 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATE : 5th July 2010. Mr.R.R.Sonawane for the petitioner. P.C. : Issue notice before admission to the respondents returnable on 9 August 2010. Notice shall indicate that the writ petition may be disposed of finally at the stage of admission itself. In addition to the court service, petitioner shall serve the respondents by private notice and file affidavit of service. Interim relief in terms of prayer clause (b) to be operative till 9 August 2010 only. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 10: FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.4848 of 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Mr.R.R.Sonawane for the petitioners. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATE : 18th November 2010 P.C. : Office to verify and report service. S.O for four weeks. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 12: FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.4848 of 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders None for the petitioner. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATE : 20thDecember 2010 P.C. : None present for the petitioner when called. Writ Petition is dismissed for non prosecution. (D.G. KARNIK,J.)

Order - Status 17: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. 4848 of 2010 Smt. Sumanbai w/d. Of Damu Bodake & ors. ... Petitioners v/s. Manohar Narayan Bodake & anr. ... Respondents Mr. R.R. Sonawane for the petitioners. CORAM:- B.R. GAVAI, J DATED :- APRIL 27, 2011. P.C. Inspite of being duly served with notice for final disposal, none appears for the respondents. Rule, Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally. The petitioners by way of present petition challenges the order dated 10th November, 2009 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division thereby rejecting the application filed by the present petitioner for setting aside no written-statement order. The respondents-plaintiffs have filed suit for partition. The petitioner no. 1 is the wife of deceased brother of the plaintiffs whereas no. 2 and 3 are the children of the petitioner no. 1. Respondents 4 and 5 are the sisters of the plaintiff. The suit summons came to be received by some of the defendants on 7th April, 2008 and by the others on 11th April, 2008. On being summoned the petitioners appeared on 3rd May, 2008 and thereafter from time to time on 26th June, 2008 and 4th July, 2008 file an application for grant of time to file written-statement. The same were granted. On the next date i.e.. 5th August, 2008, the written-statement was filed. However, since it was brought to the notice of the plaintiffs that the written-statement was filed after the period of 90 days, the application was filed on 15th September, 2008 below exhibit 19 for condonation of delay. The same was rejected on 15th October, 2008. As such the present application came to be filed for setting aside no written statement order. The parties are closely related to each other. The suit is for partition. It appears from the record that the applications filed by the present petitioner for adjournment, so as to enable them to file written-statement were granted and as such the written statement was filed beyond the period of 90 days. The delay is of 30 days. The petitioner no. 1 is the widow and no. 2 and 3 are her sons taking education whereas other petitioners are married sisters of the plaintiff who are residing at far away places. Taking into consideration these aspects of the matter and particularly that the learned trial Judge himself has granted adjournment to the petitioners to file written-statement, I am inclined to allow the petition. Rule is, therefore, made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). (B.R. GAVAI, J)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1318 OF 2018 Sudarshan Rajkumar Badguzar Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra Respondent Mr.Anand Jondhale i/b Jondhale and Co. for Applicant Ms.Veera Shinde - APP for State CORAM : SMT. S.S. JADHAV, J DATE : 7th June, 2018 P.C. : Learned APP waives service and seeks time to take instructions. Time as prayed for is granted. Stand over to 14/06/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1318 OF 2018 Sudarshan Rajkumar Badguzar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. S.S. JADHAV, J DATE : 14th June, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Stand over to 19/06/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1318 OF 2018 Sudarshan Rajkumar Badguzar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. S.S. JADHAV, J DATE : 19th June, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Stand over to 11/07/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1317 OF 2018 Ashok Devram Patil ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent WITH CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1318 OF 2018 Sudarshan Rajkumar Badguzar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent WITH CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1319 OF 2018 Kundan Mukund Khanvilkar Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra Respondent WITH CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1320 OF 2018 Pavan Ramchandra Kachre ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent WITH CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1321 OF 2018 Rohit Sunil Borse ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Mr.Anand Jondhle a/w Ms.Yashoda Jondhale a/w Mr.Babu Singh i/b Jondhale And Co For Applicant Ms.Veera Shinde - APP for State CORAM : SMT. S.S. JADHAV, J DATE : 25th June, 2018 P.C. : At the request of learned APP for State, Stand over to 12/07/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1008 OF 2019 Shri. Narayan Punja @ Punjaji Nagare ....Appellant V/S The Divisional Manager, Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation Ltd., ....Respondent Sachin Gite For Appellant CORAM : K.K. TATED, J DATE : 30th July, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the Appellant, Stand over to 6/8/2019 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: 45.1008.19-fa.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION First Appeal No.1008/2019 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders. Mr. Sachin Gite for the Appellant CORAM: K.K.TATED, J. DATED : AUGUST 6, 2019 P.C. 1 Heard. By this appeal, the Appellant claimant challenges the judgment and award dated 12.02.2019 passed by the MACT, Niphad in MACP No.45/2015 dismissing their claim petition under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. 2 Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Appellant and the reasons recorded by the Tribunal in para 13 of the impugned judgment and award, following order is passed: a. Admit. b. The Appellant is directed to file private paper book within one year from today with copy to other side, failing which the First Appeal shall stand dismissed without further reference to the court. c. Printing dispensed with. d. Call R & P. e. Hearing expedited. f. Liberty granted to the Appellant to move for early hearing once the paper book is filed and R & P is received. (K.K.TATED, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 820 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 233 OF 2007 Shivaji Shankar Ghadge ... Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. M.V. Thorat i/by Ms. Pooja V. Thorat for the applicant. Mr. J.P. Yagnik, A.P.P. for State. CORAM : NARESH H.PATIL & K.U. CHANDIWAL,JJ. DATED : JULY 18, 2011 P.C. In the light of the order passed in Criminal Application No. 376 of 2010, Criminal application No. 820 of 2011 is rejected. (K.U. CHANDIWAL,J.) (NARESH H. PATIL,J.) hvn

#VALUE!

Order - Status 16: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 5: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.673 OF 2013 Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court's Court's or orders or directions & Judge's orders. Registrar's orders. Ms Neeta Karnik for the Petitioner. Shri T.D. Deshmukh for Respondent No.1. Smt. M.P. Thakur, AGP for the State. CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.P.BHANGALE, JJ DATE : 22ND JANUARY 2013 P.C.: . Not on board. Taken on board. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the first Respondent. Heard the learned AGP for the State. Leave to amend for adding a party respondent and for incorporating additional averments in the Petition. In view of the communication dated 9th January 2013, the Petitioner can continue to act as a Principal at least till 31st January 2013. Therefore, we direct that this Petition shall be fixed for admission on 30th January 2013. ( A.P. BHANGALE, J) (A.S.OKA, J)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.673 of 2013 Neeta Sane … Petitioner V/s. Dnyanasadhana College, Through Chairman and Ors. … Respondents Ms. Neeta Karnik , Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. T.D. Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No.1. Mrs. M.P. Thakur, AGP for Respondent No.3. Ms. Chandrakanta Gongane i/b. R.A. Rodrigues for Respondent No.2. CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.P. BHANGALE, JJ. DATE : 30TH JANUARY, 2013 P.C. When the papers of this petition were produced before this Court on 22nd January, 2013 for seeking urgent relief, the papers were not circulated in advance. Therefore, it was not noticed that one of us (A.S. OKA, J.) will not be in a position to take up this petition. Hence, place it before a bench to which one of us (A.S. OKA, J.) is not a party. ( A.P. BHANGALE, J ) ( A.S. OKA, J )

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 673 OF 2013 Neeta Sane .. Petitioner Vs. Dnyanasadhana College & Ors. .. Respondents Ms Neeta Karnik for Petitioner. Mr. T. D. Deshmukh for Respondent No. 1. Ms. Chandrakanta Gongane i/b. Mr. R. A. Rodriques for Respondent No. 2. Mr. P. P. Kakade – AGP for Respondent No. 3 . CORAM : NARESH. H. PATIL & A. R. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 1ST FEBRUARY, 2013 P.C. 1] Heard. 2] The petitioner has questioned the communication made by the respondent College Dnyanasadhana, Thane dated 9.1.2013. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in view of the University Regulations after putting in one year service in absence of any adverse communication the petitioner shall be deemed to have been confirmed as Principal. 3] This fact is disputed by the counsel appearing for the respondent college. The learned counsel for the respondent college submits that the petitioner has a statutory remedy under Section 59 of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994. 4] In the facts of the case the petitioner has statutory remedy of approaching the College Tribunal under the provisions of Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994. 5] The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the communication dated 9.1.2013 the petitioner continued to act as a Principal till 31.1.2013 and prayed that the petitioner be allowed to continue to act as a Principal for a period of two weeks from today. 6] The petitioner be allowed to continue as a Principal till 14.2.2013. This court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the matter. 7] Writ Petition is disposed of. (A. R. JOSHI, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.) Chandka 2/2