All Cases

Order - Status 2: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION IN FA STAMP NO. 1531 OF 2017 In FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 28419 OF 2016 Smt. Meera Ganesh Khude And Anr. Applicant V/S Respondent Chief Officer Bharti Axa General Insurance Company Ltd. Through Mr. Ashwin Kumar Gawai Manager Legal Ajay A Joshi For Applicant CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J DATE : 20th September, 2017 P.C. : Not on board. Taken on production board, by way of praecipe. Registry note shows that matter is under search. No orders. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: Trupti p513-fast-2841-16.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2947 OF 2017 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 28419 OF 2016 Smt. Meera Ganesh Khude and Anr. …Applicants Versus Chief Officer, Bharti AXA General Insurance Company Ltd. …Respondent Mr.Vilas B. Tapkir h/f. Mr.Ajay A. Joshi for the Applicants. Mr.Rahul Mehta i/b. KMC Legal Venture for the original Appellant in FA (St.) No. 28419 of 2016. …… …... CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATED: SEPTEMBER 26, 2017 P.C. : Upon urgent mentioning, taken on Production Board. This Application is moved for withdrawal of an amount deposited by the insurance company/original appellant pursuant to the judgment and award dated 16.02.2016 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Satara, in M.A.C.P. No. 673 of 2010. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are the wife and minor daughter of the deceased. He submitted that till today, the applicants have not received any amount, except no fault liability. The learned counsel for the insurance company opposed this application and submitted that the insurance company has filed the appeal on the ground of quantum and the deceased was gratuitous licencee. In view of the submissions and the reasons mentioned in the application, the applicants are allowed to withdraw 50% amount of the compensation on an usual undertaking. The remaining amount is to be deposited in the fixed deposit in any nationalized bank. Civil Application is allowed and is accordingly disposed of. (MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.113 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.388 OF 2007 Uday Kumar Abhevardhan .. Petitioner -versus The Union of India and anr .. Respondent Mr. Anil Lalla i/b Lalla and Lalla for the Petitioner Mrs. Revati Mohite Dere for the union of India CORAM: V. M. KANADE, J. DATED: 23rd March, 2010 P.C. vks This is the second Application for bail. The first bail application rejected by this Court (Coram: A.M. Khanwilkar, J.). Therefore it is appropriate that this application be placed before the same Court. The Office to take steps. ( V.M. KANADE, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.113 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.388 OF 2007 ...... ...... Uday Kumar Abhevardhan ...Applicant Versus Union of India & Anr. ...Respondents Mr.Shankar Dhoble i/b M/s.Lalla & Lalla for Applicant. Ms.Revati Mohite Dere for Respondent No.1. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. DATED :- APRIL 16, 2010. P.C. I am informed that Mr.Anil Lala is in personal difficulty. Request for adjournment is made. Stand over to 30th April 2010 at 3.00 p.m. (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 113 of 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 388 of 2007 Uday Kumar Abhev Ardhan ....Petitioner Vs. Union of India & anr. ....Respondents Mr. Sunil Gadre i/b. Anil Lalla i/b. M/s. Lalla & Lalla for the applicant. Ms. S.V.Gajare-APP for the State. Smt. Revati Mohite Dere, advocate for respondent no.1. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR, J DATED:- MAY 07, 2010 P.C. Request for adjournment is made on the ground that Mr. Lalla, advocate for the applicant is unavailable. Stand over to 11th June, 2010 at 3.00 p.m. (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.113 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.388 OF 2007 Uday Kumar Abhev Ardhan. ....Applicant. Vs. Union of India & Anr. ....Respondents. Mr.Anil Lalla i/b. M/s. Lalla & Lalla for the applicant. Smt. Revati Mohite Dere for Respondent No.1. Mr.S.V.Gajare, APP for the State. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR, J DATED:- JUNE 11, 2010 P.C. Heard Counsel for the parties. S Present application is filed on the sole ground that the applicant has already undergone more than 6 years and 11 months of imprisonment when the application was filed. The fact that the applicant's prayer for bail was considered on merits and rejected by this Court on 7th April, 2008 while deciding Criminal Application No.950 of 2008 is not disputed. The applicant has been convicted for the offence punishable under section 21(c) r/w sec.8(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act and sentenced to suffer R.I. for 10(ten) years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh only) in default to suSffer further R.I. for one year. The fact that the applicant as of now has undergone 7 years of imprisonment is not in dispute. The question is whether inspite of mandate of section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, the Court can show indulgence to the applicant on the ground that he has undergone substantive part of sentence. In this case, the sentence undergone is over 7 years out of 10 years of Rigorous Imprisonment. To buttress the contention, the learned Counsel for the applicant has essentially relied on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Mansingh V/s. Union of India (2006) 1 SCC (Cri.) 279, which was decided by the Apex Court on September 27, 2004. Indeed, in that case the appellant was held guilty of the offence punishable under sections 8/18 and 8/15 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 and directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of Rs. 1 lakh on each count. The Apex Court considering the fact that the Appellant before it had undergone more than 7 years of imprisonment, released the appellant on bail. It is noticed that the said order has been passed by the Apex Court in the pending appeal filed by the Accused to question the order of conviction and sentence before the High Court. The question is: whether this order can be treated as a binding precedent. The learned APP has rightly invited my attention to the subsequent decision of the Apex Court in the cases of Union of India V/s Rattan Malik alias Habul (2009) 2 SCC 624, Ratan Kumar Vishwas V/s. State of U.P. & Anr. 2008 AIR SCW 7719 and Union of India v/s. Shiv Shanker Kesari(2009) 3 SCC(Cri) 505 . These decisions have expounded the sweep of section 37 of the Act. The mandate of section 37 of the Act applies on all fours to the situation where the person is in custody as under trial prisoner or for that matter at the stage of appeal before the High Court. Going by the said mandate, it is not possible to countenance the stand of the applicant that since he has undergone substantial part of the sentence should be released on bail only on that consideration. My attention has already been invited to the said decisions of our High Court in the case of Pritam Namdeo v/s. Union of India and Anr. decided on 23rd March, 2010 in Criminal Application No.1 of 2010 in Criminal Appeal No.394 of 2007 as well as in the case of Aniruddh Chavan vs. The Union of India & Anr . in Criminal Application No.433 of 2009 in Criminal Appeal No.618 of 2008 decided on January 21, 2010. Similar argument has been considered and rejected. I am in agreement with the opinion expressed in the said decisions. The Counsel for the applicant however, placed reliance on recent decision of another Single Judge of our High Court in Criminal Bail Application No. 854 of 2009 in Criminal Appeal No.1253 of 2008 decided on March 9, 2010. With utmost respect, it is not possible to place reliance on this decision to uphold the contention of the applicant. For, the said view is only on the basis of Mansingh's case (supra) . This Court would be bound by the subsequent decisions of the Apex Court which have restated the settled legal position about the sweep of section 37 of the Act. Further, the order in the case of Mansingh(supra) pressed into service may be ascribable to the inherent powers of the Apex Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. Suffice it to note that the said decision has not decided the case with reference to the sweep of section 37 of the Act, which aspect has been considered in the subsequent decisions of the Apex Court. Keeping in mind the mandate of section 37, it is not open for this Court to carve out further exception to section 37 of the Act, which would inevitably result in rewriting of the said section. In other words, merely because the applicant has already undergone substantial part of the sentence, by itself cannot be the basis to release him on bail. In the circumstances, taking over all view of the matter, this application should fail. The same is rejected. (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)

Order - Status 5: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.322 OF 2016 Mr.Jaydeep Mane for the Applicant Dr.F.R.Shaikh, APP for the Respondent No.1 CORAM :A.S.OKA AND P.D.NAIK,JJ. DATE : APRIL 4, 2016 P.C. 1 We direct the Advocate for the applicant to annex typed copy of the document on page 9. Amendment to be carried out within a period of two weeks from today. Place the application on 3rd May 2016. The Investigating Officer shall remain present in this Court on the next date along with file. (P.D.NAIK,J) (A.S.OKA,J.)

Order - Status 7: 16-apl-322-2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.322 OF 2016 Dada @ Dadasaheb Bhagwan Havaldar & Anr. .. Applicants V/s. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Vishal L. Kolekar i/by Mr.Jaydeep D. Mane for the Applicant. Dr.F.R.Shaikh, APP for Respondent No.1 CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA & P.D. NAIK, JJ. DATE : 03rd MAY 2016. P.C. Applicants have not complied with the order dated 04th April 2016. Only by way of indulgence that we extend the time granted to the applicant to comply with the said order by a period of three weeks from today. If compliance is not made, the application shall stand dismissed for nonprosecution without further reference to the Court. If the compliance is made, application shall be listed on 11th July 2016. [P.D. NAIK, J.] [ABHAY S. OKA, J.]

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION AND ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMMON ORDER CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 18TH AUGUST 2016 P.C. On account of paucity of time, rest of the matters on Daily and Supplementary Board stand adjourned on the dates fixed as per the CMIS. Sr. Nos. C.M.I.S. Date 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 36, 37, 48, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62 and 63 (Cri) th July 2016 5 34, 35, 42 and 43 (Cri) 16th December 2016 38 (OS) 22nd August 2016 39, 73 and 74 (Civil) 21st December 2016 40 and 67 (Cri) 10th October 2016 41, 47 and 65 (OS) th October 2016 5 44, 45, 46, 49, 50 and 51 (Cri) 19th December 2016 52, 53, 54, 55 and 56 (Cri) 20th December 2016 66, 70 (Cri), 71 (OS) and 72 (Cri) 29th August 2016 68 and 69 (Civil) th September 2016 7 If in any of the above matters, adinterim relief or interim relief is operative till today, the same will continue to operate till the respective next dates. If adinterim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said orders will remain unaffected. (A.A. SAYED, J ) (A.S. OKA, J )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 322 OF 2016 Dada @ Dadasaheb Bhagwan Havaldar And Anr ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : V.M. KANADE & MS. NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, JJ DATE : 16th December, 2016 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned for 16/02/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. Stand over to 16/02/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 322 OF 2016 Dada @ Dadasaheb Bhagwan Havaldar And Anr ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Mr. Nitesh J. Mohite i/by Mr.Jaydeep D Mane For Applicant Dr. F.R.Shaikh, A.P.P. for Respdt./State. CORAM : A.S. OKA & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ DATE : 16th February, 2017 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the applicant, Stand over to 22/03/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 322 OF 2016 Dada @ Dadasaheb Bhagwan Havaldar And Anr ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Mr Nitesh J Mohite i/by Jaydeep D Mane For Applicant Dr F.R.Shaikh APP for state CORAM : A.S. OKA & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ DATE : 22nd March, 2017 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the applicant , Stand over to 19/04/2017 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 322 OF 2016 Dada @ Dadasaheb Bhagwan Havaldar And Anr ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ DATE : 19th April, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time Stand Over to 14/06/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 20: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 322 OF 2016 Dada @ Dadasaheb Bhagwan Havaldar And Anr ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent None for the Applicant. Mrs.M.H.Mhatre - APP for the State. CORAM : RANJIT MORE. & SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, JJ DATE : 14th June, 2017 P.C. : None for the Petitioner/Applicant. S.O. to 12/07/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 322 OF 2016 Dada @ Dadasaheb Bhagwan Havaldar And Anr ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent None for the Applicant. Mr.S.S.Pednekar - APP for the State. CORAM : RANJIT MORE. & SMT. DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, JJ DATE : 2nd November, 2017 P.C. : None for the Petitioner/Applicant. Stand Over to 30/11/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 26: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 322 OF 2016 Dada @ Dadasaheb B. Havaldar and Another. ..Petitioners. Versus State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent. Mr. Nilesh Mohite i/b J. D. Mane for the Petitioner. Mr. F. R. Shaikh, APP for the State. Coram : Ranjit More & Dr. Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi, JJ. Date : November 30, 2017 . P. C. : Learned counsel for the Applicant seeks leave to withdraw the instant application. Leave granted. Application is allowed to be withdrawn and is disposed of as such. [Dr. Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.]

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION No. 289 OF 2016 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL (St.) No. 14685 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. Segandh B. Deshmukh, for the Applicant / Appellant. CORAM : V. M. KANADE, & Mrs. SWAPNA S. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : OCTOBER 26, 2016 PC. Issue notice before admission R/o. 5th December, 2016. Hamdast permitted. Sd/- [V. M. KANADE, J.] Sd/- [Mrs. SWAPNA S. JOSHI, J.] ________________________________________________________________ VPH Vinayak Halemath

Order - Status 6: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION C.A.M. NO.289 OF 2016 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL ST. NO.14685 OF 2016 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 : R.M. JOSHI I/c.REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 25th November, 2016 1 week granted for furnishing copy. sd/­ I/c.Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 25.11.16

Order - Status 7: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION C.A.M. NO.289 OF 2016 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL ST. NO.14685 OF 2016 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 : 09th December, 2016 S.O. to 1 week. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 09.12.16

Order - Status 11: (CAM 289 of 2016) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION No. 289 OF 2016 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL (ST) No.14685 OF 2016 Smt. Sarika Badal Shinde ...Applicant Vs. Shri Badal Vijay Shinde ...Respondent *********** Mr. Sugandh B. Deshmukh for Applicant Mr. Abhijit Patil i/b. Mr. Sushant S. Prabhune for Respondent *********** CORAM : R.M. BORDE & A.S. GADKARI, JJ. DATE : JANUARY 04, 2017 P.C. : This is an application, seeking condonation of delay of 60 days in filing the present Family Court Appeal. The decree passed by the Family Court appears to have been (CAM 289 of 2016) issued in the absence of the Appellant. In this view of the matter, the delay of 60 days in filing the present appeal is condoned. Civil application for condonation of delay is allowed and disposed of. Place the Family Court Appeal for consideration on the Board on 11.1.2017 [ A.S. GADKARI, J.] [ R.M. BORDE, J.] Vaishali Tikam

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4736 OF 2004 Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited. ... ... .... ... Petitioner. Versus Manny C. D'Mello & Ors. ... ... Respondents. Mr. M. D. Sidia with Ms. D. S. Retiwala i/by Rustamji & Ginwala for the Petitioner. Mr. Hitesh Jain for Respondent No.1. CORAM : S. A. BOBDE, J. DATED : 29TH APRIL, 2005. P.C.: Rule. Having regard to the dealership agreement dated 12th March, 1999 between the petitioner and the respondent No.1, it is clear that the respondent No.1 was inducted into the premises as dealer vide clause 2 for the purposes mentioned therein. The Petitioner itself is a Lessee of the property leased out to it by the Natu family. Clearly, this is a dispute arising out of the dealership agreement vide clause 2 thereof and is within the scope of Clause 66 which is the arbitration clause. Having regard to the admitted position that the arbitration clause has been invoked by the respondent No.1, prima facie case is made out for interim stay of the impugned order passed in a suit filed by the Respondents. Prima facie, there is no substance in the contention of the learned Counsel for the respondent No.1 that the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent No.1 is a dispute between the landlord and tenant and therefore, the suit is maintainable. Even the appellate court has observed that the respondent was inducted by the predecessor in interest of the petitioner i.e. M/s. Caltex India Limited. The Respondent No.1 has himself pleaded that he has been inducted by M/s. Caltex India Limited as a dealer, vide para 4 of the plaint. There is no cogent and reliable evidence at this stage to suggest that the respondents were inducted by the Lessor of the property in question i.e. Natu family, who is the landlord of the petitioner, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited. Hence, there shall be ad-interim order in terms of prayer clause (c), which reads thus: (c) that pending hearing and final disposal of this petition, the impugned judgment dated 11th February, 2003 be stayed. Learned Counsel for the petitioner requests for stay of this interim order. Prayer is rejected. Sd/- (S. A. BOBDE, J. )

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2432 OF 2012 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2435 OF 2012 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 14663 OF 2012 New India Assurance Co Ltd .. Applicant Vs Dinesh Bhikuram Jaiswal & Anr. .. Respondents Mr. Ramesh K. Cheulkar for the Applicant CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J DATE : 25th JULY, 2012. P.C.: Issue notice to the Respondents returnable on 29th August, 2012. There will be ad-interim stay of execution and operation of the impugned judgment and award subject to condition of the Applicant depositing the entire compensation amount with the Tribunal within a period of five weeks from today. If the amount is not deposited within the stipulated time, ad-interim stay will stand vacated without further reference to the Court. [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J ] jfoanz vkacsjdj

Order - Status 11: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2432/2012 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.14663/2012 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders Appearances, court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Mr. R. K. Cheulkar for the applicant. Mr. T. J. Mendon for respondent No.1. CORAM: S. S. SHINDE, J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 27, 2013 P.C.: The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the application for restoration of appeal against respondent No.2 is ready and he will file the same in the Registry on or before 03/10/2013. S.O. to 04/10/2013. JUDGE

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE – CIVIL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2432 OF 2012 IN FIRST APPEAL [STAMP] NO.14663 OF 2012 New India Assurance Co. Ltd. .... Applicant Vs. Dinesh Bhikuram Jaiswal & Anr. .... Respondents Mr. Ramesh K. Cheulkar for the Applicant. Mr. T.J. Mendon for Respondent No.1. CORAM: K.K. TATED, J. DATED: APRIL 16, 2014 P.C: Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The learned counsel for the applicant seeks time to take out appropriate application for substituted service on respondent No.2. Same is granted. The applicant to take out appropriate application for substituted service on respondent No.2 on or before 20-6-2014, failing which the civil application shall stand S.O. to 20-6-2014. (K.K. TATED, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4246 OF 2005 Pandurang Narayan Wakase. Applicant. Versus. The State of Maharashtra. Respondent. Shri V.V.Purwant for the Applicant. Shri R.Y.Mirza, A.P.P.for the Respondent. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. DATED : 22nd July, 2005. P.C.: Heard the learned Counsel for the Applicant and the learned A.P.P. The learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that there was absolutely no intention on the part of the Applicant to kill the victim and in fact none of the injuries are on the vital parts of the body of the victim. The learned A.P.P. pointed out the material against the Applicant. The F.I.R. discloses that when the victim was at the place of incident, the Applicant went back to his house and brought a sickle and assaulted the victim. The medical report indicates that three fingers of the victim were chopped of and in fact there was traumatic amputation of three fingers. There is a stab wound on the right eye. It is obvious that the attempt made by the Applicant is deliberate as according to the prosecution story he went back to his house and brought the sickle. Considering the gravity of the offence it is difficult to take a different view than the view taken by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Hence the Application is rejected. The trial is expedited and the same should be concluded by treating it as a High Court expedited trial. Judge.

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13191 OF 2023 In CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION STAMP NO. 13129 OF 2023 Mr. Yang Yau Shin ....PETITIONER V/S Sonal Anuj Mehra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Amar Gharte for Applicant. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 14th July, 2023 P.C. : At the request of the learned Counsel for the Appellant(s)/ Applicant(s) / Petitioner(s) / Respondent No. stand over to 21/07/2023. Ad-interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13191 OF 2023 In Civil Revision Application STAMP NO. 13129 OF 2023 Mr. Yang Yau Shin ....PETITIONER V/S Sonal Anuj Mehra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 21st July, 2023 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 15/09/2023. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13191 OF 2023 In Civil Revision Application STAMP NO. 13129 OF 2023 Mr. Yang Yau Shin ....PETITIONER V/S Sonal Anuj Mehra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH J DATE : 23rd October, 2023 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 06/11/2023. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13191 OF 2023 In CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION STAMP NO. 13129 OF 2023 Mr. Yang Yau Shin ....PETITIONER V/S Sonal Anuj Mehra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH J DATE : 6th November, 2023 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 11/12/2023. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.13191 OF 2023 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION (ST) NO.13129 OF 2023 Yang Yau Shin Applicant. V/s. Sonal Anuj Mehra Respondent. Mr. Amar Gharte a/w. Ms. Aishwarya D. for the Applicant. CORAM : SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 11th DECEMBER, 2023. P.C.:- Issue notice to respondent returnable on 8/1/2024. In addition to Court notice, Applicant to serve the respondent by private notice and file affidavit of service before next date. Stand over to 8/1/2024. (SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.)

Order - Status 15: KANCHAN VINOD MAYEKAR Digitally signed by KANCHAN VINOD MAYEKAR Date: 2024.01.09 13:26:12 +0530 28 - CRAST 13129 OF 2023.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION (ST) NO. 13129 OF 2023 ALONGWITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13191 OF 2023 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION (ST) NO. 13129 OF 2023 Mr. Yang Yau Shin ….. Petitioner/ Applicant VERSUS Sonal Anuj Mehra ….. Respondent Mr.Amar Gharte a/w. Ms.Aishwarya Dangle for the Petitioner/Applicant. Ms.Sonal A.Mehra – Respondent present in person. CORAM: RAJESH S. PATIL, J. DATE : 8 JANUARY, 2024 P.C. :- After the matter was heard for some time, learned counsel appearing for the applicant on instruction from his client seeks leave to withdraw the interim application for condonation of delay along with Civil Revision Application. Interim application is disposed of as withdrawn. KVM So also, the Civil Revision Application is also disposed of. The parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order. [RAJESH S. PATIL, J.]

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13191 OF 2023 In CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION STAMP NO. 13129 OF 2023 Mr. Yang Yau Shin ....PETITIONER V/S Sonal Anuj Mehra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJESH S. PATIL J DATE : 11th January, 2024 P.C. : Wrongly on board. Remove from the Board. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 5: FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.5912 of 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Ms.Mamta Sharma i/b Lalit Jain for the petitioner. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATE : 10th August 2010. P.C. : Colleague of Mr.Jain, advocate for the petitioner states that Mr.Jain is not well and prays for an adjournment. S.O for two weeks. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 20: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO. 5912 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. L.V. Jain for the Petitioner. Mr. Amet Shete for Respondent No.1. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 28th JUNE, 2011 P.C.: Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the writ petition unconditionally. The petition is disposed of as withdrawn. ..... (D.G.KARNIK, J.)