AI Overview...
-
Pandharinath Shelke - Involved in legal cases where his demand was questioned; testimony related to demand was deemed untrustworthy due to doubts about the accused's claims and credibility issues Pandharinath Shelke VS State of Maharashtra - Bombay.
-
Revenue Record & Land Ownership - Pandharinath Tulshiram Shelke, the father of Pandharinath Shelke, was recorded as owner of a portion of land (1 Hectare 22 Ares in Survey No. 1, Hissa No. 2), but no steps were taken to mutate his name officially in the revenue records, indicating incomplete legal formalities regarding land transfer Kisan Bhimrao Patil VS State of Maharashtra - Bombay, Kisan Bhimrao Patil, R/o Sawargaon VS State Of Maharashtra - Bombay.
-
Judicial Precedents - Pandharinath Shelke has been cited in multiple judicial decisions, notably in cases such as Delhi Administration (AIR 1976 SC 294) and Pandharinath Shelke v. State of Maharashtra (2005(2) Bom.C.R. (Cri.) 940). These cases have contributed to jurisprudence related to criminal law and land disputes, emphasizing the importance of proper legal procedures and the credibility of witnesses State of Maharashtra VS Shivram - Crimes, State of Maharashtra VS Shivram s/o Bhikaji Pawar - Bombay, Kashinath Shiru Ahire VS State Of Maharashtra - Bombay, Kashinath Shiru Ahire VS State of Maharashtra - Bombay.
-
Overall Insights - Pandharinath Shelke's legal history involves issues of witness credibility, demand allegations, and land ownership formalities. His involvement in court cases highlights the significance of accurate record-keeping and reliable testimony in judicial proceedings.
Conclusion: Pandharinath Shelke is a notable figure in legal contexts involving criminal allegations and land disputes, with his cases frequently cited in judicial precedents that underscore procedural correctness and evidentiary reliability.
Search Results for "Pandharinath Shelke"
2005 0 Supreme(Bom) 201 • India - Bombay
V.M.KANADE
W. 1 regarding demand made by accused No. 1 Shelke also becomes very doubtful and the entire testimony of P. W. 1 therefore, becomes untrustworthy and, therefore, cannot be relied upon regarding question of demand. ... W. 1 shelke. Thus, the link which is sought to be established between accused no. 1, accused No. 2 and P. W. 4 is broken. P. W. 1 in his complaint has stated that P. W. 4 had visited his shop and had asked him to meet accused No. 1.
2018 0 Supreme(Bom) 1411 • India - Bombay
P.R.BORA
2023 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 17195 • India - Bombay High Court
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE
• India - Bombay High Court
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE
2020 0 Supreme(Bom) 1303 • India - Bombay
MANGESH S.PATIL
However, no steps were taken to mutate his name in place of Pandharinath Tulshiram Shelke in the revenue record. ... Though the petitioners’ father, Pandharinath Tulshiram Shelke and few other persons were the owners of different portions of the land Survey No. 1, only a portion admeasuring 1 Hectare 22 Ares was recorded in the revenue record of Hissa No. 2 belonging to Pandharinath Tulshiram Shelke. ... The petitioners’ father, the predecessor of the respondent No. 5 Pandhar....
2020 0 Supreme(Bom) 895 • India - Bombay
MANGESH S.PATIL
However, no steps were taken to mutate his name in place of Pandharinath Tulshiram Shelke in the revenue record. ... Though the petitioners' father, Pandharinath Tulshiram Shelke and few other persons were the owners of different portions of the land Survey No. 1, only a portion admeasuring 1 Hectare 22 Ares was recorded in the revenue record of Hissa No. 2 belonging to Pandharinath Tulshiram Shelke. ... The petitioners' father, the predecessor of the respondent No. 5 Pandhar....
• India - Crimes
S.S.SHINDE
Delhi Administration, [A.I.R. 1976 S.C. 294] and also in the case of Pandharinath Shelke v. State of Maharashtra [2005(2) Bom.C.R. (Cri.) 940]. In another case, this Court in case Avinash Sitaram Garware vs.
2011 0 Supreme(Bom) 180 • India - Bombay
S.S.SHINDE
Delhi Administration, [A.I.R. 1976 S.C. 294] and also in the case of Pandharinath Shelke vs. State of Maharashtra [2005(2) Bom.C.R. (Cri.) 940]. In another case, this Court in case Avinash Sitaram Garware vs.
2019 0 Supreme(Bom) 2241 • India - Bombay
K.K.SONAWANE
Learned counsel for appellant in support of his submissions placed reliance on the judicial precedents in the cases viz- Yuvraj Chintaman Selokar Versus State of Maharashtra,2012 4 BCR(Cri) 371 , Pandharinath Shelke Versus State of Maharashtra, (2005) 2 BCR(Cri) 940 , Suresh Kumar Shrivastav Versus State
2019 0 Supreme(Bom) 2519 • India - Bombay
K.K.SONAWANE
(Cri.) 371, Pandharinath Shelke Versus State of Maharashtra reported in 2005 (2) Bom. C.R.(Cri.) 940, Suresh Kumar Shrivastav Versus State of M.P. reported in 1994 Cri.L.J. 3738, Ram Swaroop Rathore Versus State of M.P. 2000 Cri.L.J. 1882(1), G.V.
Filter by Legal Phrase
