All Cases

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLAE SIDE Writ Petition No. 4026 of 2007 Lasalgaon Vibhag Sahakari Kharedi Vikri Sangh Ltd. ..Petitioner vs. 1.The Asstt.Registrar Cooperative Societies & Ors. ..Respondents Shri A.S.Desai for petitioner. Shri P.P.Kakade, A.G.P. for respondent nos.1, 2 and 6. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. 4th July, 2007 P.C. The petitioner society removed the Managing Committee members on the ground that they had incurred disqualification under Rule 58(2) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Rules, 1961. That action was subject matter of challenge at the instance of the members and the Asstt.Registrar Cooperative Societies, Niphad, District Nashik has held that the decision of the society is without any authority of law in as much as the concerned persons have not been declared as defaulters. There is no adjudication in that behalf. That order of the Asstt.Registrar was challenged by the Society in Revision Petition No.89 of 2006 and the Divisional Joint Registrar having upheld the same by the impugned order, the petitioner society is before me invoking my writ jurisdiction. The only contention raised by Shri Desai is that the aggrieved persons have no right to approach the Asstt.Registrar in as much as they had the remedy of filing a Dispute under sec.91 before the competent Cooperative Court. That was the only remedy available to them in law. Asstt.Registrar had no jurisdiction to entertain their grievance. Be that as it may, on facts, it has been concurrently observed that the pre-requisite for initiating action has not been satisfied in the present case. In para 11 of the impugned order, the Joint Registrar has observed that C.E.O. of the society issued letter dated 22nd August, 2006 informing the concerned Managing Committee members that they have incurred disqualification under sec.73FF of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. Hence, they cease to be the Managing Committee members. It has been observed by the Joint Registrar that powers under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act of removal are vested only with the Registrar and unless action under sec.78 of the Act is initiated there is nothing like an automatic cessation. That no order under sec.78 has been passed is not disputed by Shri Desai. That is settled position in law and reference has been made by both the authorities to the decisions of this Court in that behalf. Having observed that mandatory pre-requisites are not satisfied for invoking the powers to disqualify the Managing Committee Members and to remove them, I do not wish to enter into any larger controversy. More so, when the factual position remains undisputed. As to whether the Asstt.Registrar would have jurisdiction to interfere with the action of disqualification or removal or not is a matter which can be gone into and decided in an appropriate case. That aspect is expressly left open. I am of the view that the findings of fact are not vitiated by any error apparent nor can be termed as perverse. Hence, the writ jurisdiction is not available to the petitioner. Petition is summarily dismissed. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE FIRST APPEAL NO.1400 OF 2005 -----------------------------------:------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.M.V.Shingade i/b Mr.G.N.Salunke for the appellants. Mr.N.V.Walavalkar i/b Mr.Sanjeev Singh for respondent no.1. Mr.J.J.Xavier for the respondent no.2. CORAM: D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED: 14TH NOVEMBER, 2006. P.C. : . Heard learned counsel for the parties. Mr.Walavalkar, learned senior counsel for respondent no.1 seeks liberty to file paper book and has also tendered the same in the court. He has also served a copy of the paper book on the other side. The paper book is accepted and in view thereof printing is dispensed with. Office is directed to place the appeal for hearing, as directed earlier by this court vide order dated 4.10.2006, in the week commencing from 27.11.2006. It is open for the appellants to file additional paper book, if they so desire, before 27.11.2006. (D.B.Bhosale, J.)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1400 OF 2005. New Borivali Prajakta Cooperative Housing ... Society Ltd. Appellant. Versus. M/s.Ashirwad Builders and others. ... Respondents. None for the Appellant. Shri Sanjeer Singh the Respondent No.1. CORAM : ABHAY S.OKA, J. DATED : 9th January, 2007. P.C.: 1.Not on board. Taken on board. 2.The Appeals of the year 1985 onwards are pending for final hearing and therefore, no specific date of hearing as of today can be fixed in this Appeal of the year 2005. No orders. Judge.

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1400 OF 2005 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Court's or Judge's Orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - None present. CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J. DATED : 27th August, 2007 P.C. 1.Stand over after twelve weeks. [ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.]

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.1400 of 2005 ... New Borivli Prajakta CHS Ltd. Appellant versus M/s.Ashirwad Builders & Anr Respondents None for the appellant. Mr.Sushil K. Chaurasia,Advocate for respondent no.1. CORAM : A.P. BHANGALE,J DATED : SEPTEMBER 6, 2013 P.C. 1 This appeal is preferred against judgment and order dated 5 May 2005 passed by Bombay City Civil Court in L.C.Suit No.925 of 2004. The appellant herein (original plaintiff) had filed suit for declaration that plan sanctioned by Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay in favour of M/s.Ashirwad Builders firm having office at 1, Jai Abhilasha, Jai Raj Nagar, Linking Road, Borivali (West), Mumbai 400 092, is illegal and for permanent injunction against defendant no.1 seeking to restrain him from constructing the building pursuant to sanctioned plan on the plot no.135 at 57 Road, Borivali (West) Mumbai. 2 It is submitted on behalf of respondent no.1 that earlier the appellant plaintiff had filed Suit No.1679 of 2002 for perpetual injunction against the respondent builder. It was compromised between the parties and detailed consent terms were recorded in the said suit whereby parties are, and were bound. The respondent no.1 offered payment but it was refused by plaintiff deliberately. According to learned Advocate for the respondent, he was and is ready and willing to observe those terms mentioned in consent terms as the same are binding between the parties to the suit. Therefore, any question arising in relation to execution discharge and satisfaction of decree by consent terms in L.C. Suit No.1679 of 2002 ought to have been dealt with in execution of decree in the said suit in view of section 47 of Code of Civil Procedure and not otherwise. Furthermore, it is contended that respondent no.1 is entitled to construct in accordance with sanctioned plan by Municipal Corporation of Gr.Mumbai and plaintiff have no right to claim any injunction against respondent no.1 when they are acting lawfully constructing in accordance with sanctioned plan. 3 Nobody appeared on behalf of plaintiffs appellant although they are represented by Advocate Mr.G.N.Salunkhe on record. 4 For the reasons stated above therefore, there is no merit in the appeal as a remedy for the appellant is to execute the decree by consent terms as finalised in S.C.Suit No.1679 of 2002. 6 Interim order, if any, stands vacated. ( A.P. BHANGALE, J )

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.15926 OF 2023 Bhaskar Pratap Mahadik .. Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra, Through Department of Education and Ors. .. Respondents Ms. Mrunmayi Khambete, i/by Mr. Ajay A. Joshi, for the Petitioner. Mr. V.M. Mali, AGP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR & FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ DATE : 20TH DECEMBER, 2023. P.C. : On the motion made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is permitted to be withdrawn. Writ Petition is disposed of as withdrawn. [ FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J. ] [ A.S. CHANDURKAR, J. ]

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6590 OF 2017 M/s. Ashirwad Nice Developers ....Petitioner V/S Mr. Chotelal Chunilal Yadav ....Respondent CORAM : B.P. COLABAWALLA, J DATE : 28th June, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is stand over to 07/07/2017. Ad-interim relief 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 WRIT PETITION NO. 6590 OF 2017 M/s. Ashirwad Nice Developers ....Petitioner V/S Mr. Chotelal Chunilal Yadav ....Respondent CORAM : B.P. COLABAWALLA, J DATE : 7th July, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of tim, stand over to 22/08/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: 904.wp.6590.17 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6590 OF 2017 M/s ASHIRWAD NICE Developers ..Petitioner Vs. Mr Chotelal Chunilal Yadav ..Respondent Mr. Ranjit Bhonsale i/b Rakesh Agrawal, for the Petitioner. CORAM :- B. P. COLABAWALLA, J. DATE :- JULY 19, 2017. P. C.: The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner seeks leave to withdraw this Writ Petition with liberty to canvas all contentions before the Trial Court. Leave is granted. 2 The Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed. ( B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY 1/1 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2273 OF 2021 … Mr.Ashok Rajaram Yadav ...Petitioner v/s. Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.Siddharth Samantaray i/b Dimple Tejani for the Petitioner. Mr.Ashutosh Mishra for Respondent No.1. Mr.Zariv Bharucha a/w Rishi Thakur and Mr.Umang Thakur for Respondent Nos.2 & 3. … CORAM : A.A. SAYED & MADHAV JAMDAR, JJ. DATED : 29 JUNE 2021 (THROUGH V.C.) P.C.: Learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3 states that secured asset which is the subject matter of the present Writ Petition has been sold in a subsequent auction sale, which was conducted on 28-06- 2021. In the circumstances, we are not inclined to entertain the Petition, which is filed by the highest bidder in an earlier auction sale and seeking time to deposit the balance amount of consideration in respect of the earlier auction sale. The Petition is dismissed with liberty to the Petitioner to approach the appropriate forum. All contentions are kept open. (MADHAV JAMDAR,J.) (A.A.SAYED, J.)

Order - Status 7: SSK/33 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1904 OF 2009 Laxman Arjun Dongre ....Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents None for the Petitioner. Mrs. S. N. Gawade, APP. CORAM : D. B. BHOSALE & R. V. MORE, JJ. DATED : 20th APRIL, 2010. P.C.: None appears for the petitioner. This petition was filed in July-2009. With the passage of time, it appears that the petitioner has lost interest in prosecuting the petition and hence, nobody is appearing for the petitioner. We are therefore, constrained to dismiss this petition for non-prosecution. Order accordingly. (R. V. MORE, J.) (D. B. BHOSALE, J.)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION W.P. NO. 6159 OF 2009 Deccan Education Society, Pune and Anr. ..Petitioners Vs. Shri.Ashutosh Nandkishore Ranade and Ors. ..Respondents .... Mr. V.D.Borwankar Adv. for Petitioners Mr. A.I.Khemani AGP for Respondent No.2 CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : AUGUST 25, 2009 .... P.C.: Notice to respondent no.1 returnable on 9th September, 2009. In addition to that, the learned advocate for the petitioner to serve respondent no.1 by private service and file affidavit of service. Learned AGP waives service of notice for respondent no.2. [ SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION W.P. NO.6159 OF 2009 Deccan Education Society Fergusson CollegeMr. and Ors. ..Petitioners Vs. Shri.Ashutosh Nandkishore Ranade and Ors. ..Respondents .... Mr.V.D.Borwankar Adv. for Petitioners Mr.A.I.Khemani AGP for Respondent No.2. Mr.S.M.Joshi Adv. for Respondent No.3. .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 09, 2009 P.C.: The learned advocate for the Petitioner states that he will file affidavit of service by 17.9.2009. Time to complete the inquiry, is extended upto 30.9.2009. S.O. 23.9.2009. [ SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6159 OF 2009 .... Deccan Education Society & Anr. ...Petitioners V/s. Ashutosh Nandkishore Ranade & Ors. ...Respondents. .... Mr.V.D.Borwankar, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.A.M.Joshi, Advocate, for respondent no.1. CORAM : R.S.MOHITE, J. DATE : 13th NOVEMBER, 2009. P.C. The employee has filed a cross petition bearing Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 20904 of 2009, which is not on board today. By consent, these two writ petitions to be kept together for admission. Stand over to 19th November 2009. (R.S.MOHITE, J.)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.2501 OF 2021 Sagar @ Sangpal Gulabrao Jamnik ] Applicant vs. State of Maharashtra ] Respondent Ms. Mayuri Hatle, for the Applicant. Smt.Rutuja Abmekar, APP for the State. CORAM : BHARATI DANGRE, J DATE : 12th OCTOBER, 2022. P.C. 1] Since the offences invoke against the Applicant are under the provisions of POCSO Act, let the complainant be added as party-Respondent No.2. 2] After necessary amendment is being carried out, Issue notice to Respondent No.2 returnable on 29.11.2022. 3] Let the learned APP intimate the complainant through the Investigating Officer about her impleadment in the application and also apprise her of her right of being represented through counsel of her choice or through legal aid. [BHARATI DANGRE, J]

Order - Status 6: Urmila Ingale IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION URMILA PRAMOD INGALE Digitally signed by URMILA PRAMOD INGALE Date: 2022.11.30 10:52:53 +0530 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2501 OF 2021 Mr. Sagar @ Sang Pal Gulabrao Jamnik ..Applicant vs. State of Maharashtra ..Respondent Ms. Mayuri D. Hatl,e for applicant. Ms. P.N. Dabholkar, APP for respondent-State. CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : NOVEMBER 29, 2022 P.C. : 1. The Learned APP submits that the complainant has been served and she wants to be represented through legal aid. Mr. Akshay Pai is requested to appear on behalf of the complainant and represent her. 2. List the matter on 06/12/2022. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 2501 OF 2021 Sagar @ Sang Pal Gulabrao Jamnik APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 6th December, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 16/12/2022 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 2501 OF 2021 Sagar @ Sang Pal Gulabrao Jamnik ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Ms. Mayuri D. Hatle for Applicant. Ms. G. P. Mulekar, APP for State. Mr. Akshay Pai for Respondent No. 2 CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 16th December, 2022 P.C. : S. O. to 20/12/2022 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 2501 OF 2021 Sagar @ Sang Pal Gulabrao Jamnik APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 20th December, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 05/01/2023 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.2501 OF 2021 SAGAR @ SANGPAL GULABRAO JAMNIK ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. ..RESPONDENTS ------------ Ms. Mayuri D. Hatle for the applicant. Mr. Akshay Pai for respondent No.2. Mr. N. B. Patil, APP for the State. ------------ CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : JANUARY 5, 2023. P.C. : 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant seeks leave to withdraw the application. A request is made to expedite the trial as the applicant is in custody since 22/09/2020. The FIR is lodged on 28/07/2020. Considering that the applicant is in custody for more than 2 years and 3 months, the trial Court is requested to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within a period of six months from today. In any case, considering that the applicant is incarcerated for this long a period, the trial Court is requested to record the evidence of the child within a period of one month from the date when this order is produced on record. 3. Liberty to apply for bail in case the trial does not substantially proceed during the period of six months from today. 4. Subject to what is observed hereinabove, the application is allowed to be withdrawn and disposed of. 5. I appreciate the assistance rendered by Mr. Pai, learned advocate, who was requested to appear on behalf of the victim. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2501 OF 2021 Sagar @ Sang Pal Gulabrao Jamnik Versus...Applicant ...RespondentThe State Of Maharashtra...Respondent ____ None for the Applicant Ms. Anamika Mlahotra, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : $28^{text{th}}$ AUGUST 2023. P.C. : The letter dated 5 th July 2023 is received from District Judge-7 and Additional Sessions Judge, Thane, for extension of one year time for disposal of Special (POCSO) Case No. 506/2020. Considering the reasons mentioned in the letter, one year time is extended to dispose of Special (POCSO) Case No. 506/2020. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)