Geek Upd8 - Online Law Reporter

Latest Post

Bombay High Court Judgments


Before :- R.D. Dhanuka, J.
Second Appeal No. 634 of 2013. D/d. 23.12.2015.

Shri Mangesh Balkrushna Bhoir Age 37 yrs., Occupation : Business R/at Dhansar, Tal. Palghar, ) Dist. Thane - Appellant
Sau. Leena Mangesh Bhoir Age 35 yrs., Occupation R/at Through Bhaskar Laxman Patil Tembhi, Post Navapur, Tal. Palghar Dist. Thane - Respondent

For the Appellant :- Seema Sarnaik i/b Raj Khude, Advocates.
For the Respondent :- Y.R. Bhate with Kirankumar Phakade, Advocates.

R.D. Dhanuka, J. - By this second appeal, the appellant has impugned the order passed by the Lower Appellate Bench granting reliefs in favour of the respondent in the civil appeal filed by the respondent. The appellant was the original petitioner in Marriage Petition and the respondent herein was the original respondent in the Marriage Petition.

Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Judgments


Before:- S.R. Waghmare, J.
Criminal Revision No. 949 of 2015. D/d. 10.02.2016.

Naresh Sharma - Petitioner
Jyoti Sharma - Respondent

For the Petitioner :- Ms. Sadhna Pathak and Shri Kailash Sinjonia, learned Counsel.
For the Respondent :- Shri K.K. Kaushal, learned Counsel.

Mrs. S.R. Waghmare, J. - By this revision under section 397 r/w 401 of the Cr.P.C., the petitioner husband Naresh Sharma has been aggrieved by the order dated 25/06/2015 passed by the 8th Additional District and Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal No.363/2014 under Section 29, The Protection of Women Domestic Voilence Act,

Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Judgments


Before :- R. C. Lahoti, J.
Civil Revision 71 of 1990. D/d. 12.8.1991.

Radheshyam Agrawal - Applicant
Hariom Trading Co. and others - Non-applicants.

For the Petitioner :- Mr. N. K. Jain, Advocate
For the Respondent :- Mr. N. K. Modi, Advocate.

R. C. Lahoti, J. - The debtor-petitioner has come up in revision aggrieved by the order dated 26-3-90 passed by the Insolvency Court directing a notice under Section 19(2) of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act', for short) to be published in local newspapers and also served on other creditors who are not the petitioners.

In the Court of the Lahore Conspiracy Case Tribunal, Lahore constituted under Ordinance no.181 of 1930

To the Superintendent of the Central Jail at Lahore

Warrant of Execution on Sentence of Death
Warrant of Execution on Sentence of Death of Shahid Sardar Bhagat Singh
Whereas Bhagat Singh son of Kishan Singh, resident of Khawasrian, Lahore, one of the prisioners in the Lahore Conspiracy Case, having been found guilty by us of the offences under section 121

Bombay High Court Judgments


Before :- B.P. Dharmadhikari and Mrs. Swapna Joshi, JJ.
Family Court Appeal No. 57 of 2015. D/d. 31.1.2017.

Shri Nitin s/o Omprakash Agrawal Aged about 38 years, occu: Business R/o Apartment No.303, Jagat Apartment Ravi Nagar, Nagpur. - Petitioner
Smt. Rekha w/o Nitin Agrawal (falsely claiming so) Aged about 36 years, occu: Household R/o Flat No.304, Shri Vinayak apartment, Gopalnagar, 3rd Bus Stop Nagpur22. - Respondents

For the Petitioner :- A.S. Jaiswal, senior counsel with H.R. Gadhia, Advocates.
For the Respondent :- S.G.Joshi, Advocate.

Mrs. Swapna Joshi, J. - The appellant/husband has preferred the present Appeal under section 19 of the Family Court's Act,1984 read with Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 1.4.2015 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court No.2, Nagpur, whereby the Petition No.A. 1087/2013 filed by the respondent/wife for restitution of conjugal rights, under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been allowed.

Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Judgments


(Jaipur Bench)
Before :- R.S. Chauhan, J.
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1626 of 2002. D/d. 21.8.2006.

Ram Niwas - Appellant
Smt. Chhoti Devi and others - Respondents

For the Appellant :- Rinesh Gupta, Advocate.
For the Respondent :- None.

R.S. Chauhan, J. - The appellant has challenged the order dated 10.05.2002 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No.1, Sikar whereby the learned Judge has dismissed the application under Order 9 Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Code (henceforth, to be referred to as the Code, for short).

Puneet Batish Advocate

{facebook#} {twitter#} {google-plus#} {pinterest#} {youtube#}

Contact Form


Email *

Message *

Powered by Blogger.
Javascript DisablePlease Enable Javascript To See All Widget