AI Overview...
Understanding Vitthal Kondhalkar Litigation Records: Key Indian Court Cases
In the realm of Indian jurisprudence, certain names and cases stand out due to their illustrative value in procedural and substantive law. Searches for Vitthal Kondhalkar litigation records often reveal a web of interconnected cases spanning criminal trials, special statutes like the SC/ST Act and TADA, evidence principles, and land disputes. This post breaks down prominent cases from court judgments, providing clarity on legal principles without offering specific legal advice. Always consult a qualified attorney for personalized guidance, as legal outcomes depend on individual circumstances.
These records highlight recurring themes in Indian law, such as the application of Section 18 in special acts, the role of test identification parades (TIP), and procedural transfers between courts. Let's dive into the key cases and principles extracted from available judgments.
Criminal Trials and Special Acts: TADA and SC/ST Provisions
One cornerstone case involves the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) and its interplay with general criminal laws. In a murder and attempt to murder case under IPC Sections 302 and 307 r/w 147, 148, 149, the Designated Court transferred the matter to the Sessions Court after finding no prima facie case under TADA Section 3(1). The Supreme Court upheld this, stating:
Court do not see any merit in contention... that even after Designated Court came to conclusion that no ground was made out under Section 3(1) of Act, it was duty bound by virtue of Section 12(1) of Act to proceed with trial for other offences... course adopted by Designated Court in transferring case to Sessions Court is clearly in keeping with Section 18 of Act. Niranjan Singh Karam Singh Punjabi, Advocate: State Of Maharashtra: State Of Maharashtra: Jitendra Bhimraj Bijjaya VS Jitendra Bhimraj Bijjaya: Jitendrabhimrajbijjaya: Jitendra Bhimraj Bijjaya: State Of Maharashtra - 1997 2 Supreme 29
This illustrates how Section 18 of TADA permits transfer when special act provisions don't apply, emphasizing efficiency in ordinary criminal courts for inter-gang rivalries not qualifying as terrorism.
Similarly, under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act), Section 18 bars anticipatory bail if a prima facie case exists:
Section 18 of the SC/ST Act applies to the case and hence petitioners are not entitled to anticipatory bail. Operation and application of Section 438, Cr.P.C. is excluded if a case is prima facie made out under the Act. VILAS PANDURANG PAWAR VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - 2012 6 Supreme 605
Courts avoid deep evidence analysis at bail stages, distinguishing prior precedents like 1996 Cri. L.J. 2743.
Key Takeaway on Special Acts
- TADA/SC/ST Section 18: Facilitates transfers or bail restrictions; courts assess prima facie applicability without full trials.
- Typically, these provisions prioritize victim protection and swift justice in sensitive cases.
Evidence Principles: Test Identification Parades and Section 27 Discoveries
Vitthal Kondhalkar litigation records frequently intersect with evidence law, particularly Evidence Act Section 9 on identification. A dacoity-murder case (IPC Sections 396, 506 etc.) clarified TIP's role:
The substantive evidence is the evidence of identification in Court... The necessity for holding an identification parade can arise only when the accused are not previously known to the witnesses... Failure to hold a test identification parade would not make inadmissible the evidence of identification in Court. Amitsingh Bhikamsing Thakur VS State Of Maharashtra - 2007 1 Supreme 717
Delay in TIP isn't fatal if beyond control, and court identification trumps prior parades, which are merely corroborative. Relationship between witness and victim doesn't automatically discredit testimony if scrutinized carefully.
On Evidence Act Section 27 (discoveries), the court outlined seven requirements:
- Fact must be relevant.
- Fact discovered in consequence of accused's information.
- Accused in custody.
- Only portion relating strictly to discovery admissible. Amitsingh Bhikamsing Thakur VS State Of Maharashtra - 2007 1 Supreme 717
Open-place discoveries remain valid if criteria met.
Practical Implications
- TIP: Rule of prudence, not mandate; stronger with prior acquaintance.
- Section 27: Includes place, object, and accused's knowledge; strictly limited to discovery facts.
Land and Civil Disputes: Consolidation, Regularization, and Specific Performance
Land-related cases appear prominently. Under the Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947 Section 32, powers to vary schemes must be exercised within a reasonable period (ordinarily not after 3 years post-finalization). Padmabai Narayan Chaudhary VS Deputy Director of Land Records, Aurangabad Region, Aurangabad - 2020 Supreme(Bom) 13
In regularization disputes, daily wage municipal employees can't claim permanency absent sanctioned posts under Maharashtra municipal laws. Municipal Council, Tirora VS Tulsidas Baliram Bindhade - 2016 Supreme(Bom) 873
Specific performance suits under Specific Relief Act Section 20 fail without best evidence on debts/mortgages; adverse inferences drawn. Laxman Tatyaba Kankate VS Taramati Harishchandra Dhatrak - 2010 Supreme(SC) 559
Vitthal Kondhalkar references in land revenue contexts (e.g., Maharashtra Land Revenue Code Sections 59, 315) address watan abolitions and alienations, rejecting summary evictions without due process. Vithal Tanku Kolim since deceased, through his legal heirs & representatives VS Laxman Gotu Attarde, since deceased, through his LRs - 2020 Supreme(Bom) 107
Recent and Diverse Litigation Snippets
- Murder/Rape Cases: Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain; brutality against minors justifies 'rarest of rare' death penalties. Unexamined witnesses weaken prosecution. Shatrughna Baban Meshram VS State of Maharashtra - 2020 Supreme(SC) 647 Prabhakaran vs State, Represented by, The Inspector of Police, Jeyamangalam Police Station - 2026 Supreme(Mad) 803
- Election Petitions: High Courts must allow evidence before dismissing; day-to-day trials mandated. Uttamrao Shivdas Jankar VS Ranjitsinh Vijaysinh Mohite-Patil - 2009 Supreme(SC) 1100
- FIR and TIP Absences: Names omitted from FIR not fatal if prosecution proves case; TIP unnecessary for known accused. Latesh @ Dadu Baburao Karlekar VS State of Maharashtra - 2018 1 Supreme 524
- Service Laws: Probationer termination valid if performance records maintained, even without formal discipline. ASHOK s/o PANDURANG JANJAL VS SECRETARY, TULSABAI KAWAL VIDYALAYA, PATUR - 2006 Supreme(Bom) 992
Procedural Nuances Across Cases
- Res Judicata: Bars relitigation of same cause; applies in land disputes under Mamlatdars' Courts Act. Ashok Devman Gangurde VS Dagu Chiman Gangurde - 2020 Supreme(Bom) 718
- Delay Condonation: Not for negligence in summary suits or quashing applications. Tropical Industries International Pvt. Ltd. vs Vitthal Cashew Industries - 2026 Supreme(Del) 222 Sunil Vitthal Jadhav VS Shamji Shankar Gawali - 2009 Supreme(Bom) 1689
- Quashing Proceedings: Criminal cases for misappropriation not quashed if allegations show criminal intent. Basavant s/o Shivangouda Patil VS State of Karnataka - 2017 Supreme(Kar) 226
Conclusion: Key Takeaways from Vitthal Kondhalkar Litigation Records
Vitthal Kondhalkar litigation records encapsulate core Indian legal tenets:
- Special Statutes: Sections like 18 in TADA/SC/ST streamline proceedings.
- Evidence: Court ID paramount; TIP corroborative.
- Land/Service: Procedural fairness, timely action essential.
- General: Prosecution bears burden; doubts must be reasonable, not theoretical.
| Theme | Principle | Case Ref |
|-------|-----------|----------|
| TADA Transfer | Section 18 allows Sessions Court shift | Niranjan Singh Karam Singh Punjabi, Advocate: State Of Maharashtra: State Of Maharashtra: Jitendra Bhimraj Bijjaya VS Jitendra Bhimraj Bijjaya: Jitendrabhimrajbijjaya: Jitendra Bhimraj Bijjaya: State Of Maharashtra - 1997 2 Supreme 29 |
| SC/ST Bail | No anticipatory if prima facie | VILAS PANDURANG PAWAR VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - 2012 6 Supreme 605 |
| TIP | Not substantive evidence | Amitsingh Bhikamsing Thakur VS State Of Maharashtra - 2007 1 Supreme 717 |
| Land Variation | Reasonable time limit | Padmabai Narayan Chaudhary VS Deputy Director of Land Records, Aurangabad Region, Aurangabad - 2020 Supreme(Bom) 13 |
These cases underscore judicial caution, evidence scrutiny, and procedural rigor. For researchers or parties involved, they offer precedents on transfers, bail bars, and evidentiary weights. This analysis draws from public judgments; actual application varies.
Disclaimer: This post provides general insights based on reported cases. It is not legal advice. Laws evolve, and outcomes depend on facts. Seek professional counsel for your situation.
Search Results for "Vitthal Kondhalkar Litigation Records Explained"
1997 2 Supreme 29 • India - Supreme Court
A.M.AHMADI, N.M.KASLIWAL
in transferring case to Sessions Court is clearly in keeping with Section 18 of Act - Before we part we may state that Mr. ... statement, special leave petition will stand disposed of as not pressed – However state that Sessions Court to which case stand ... 149 – Criminal Trial – Offence of Murder and Injuries and Attempt to Murder – Alleged that When deceased and his companion were proceeding ... one Raju alias Avtar Singh, son of the appellant of Criminal Appeal No. 703 / 89, and for injuries caused ....
2012 6 Supreme 605 • India - Supreme Court
P.SATHASIVAM, RANJAN GOGOI
P.C. is excluded if a case is prima facie made out under the Act. ... L.J. 2743 - Distinguished ... Facts of the case: ... <p align="justify ... ; Section 18 of the SC/ST Act applies to the <strong>case and hence petitioners are not entitled to anticipatory bail. ... Court is not expected to indulge in critical analysis of the evidence on record. ... Shrirang Pawar, Deepak Bhagade, Parmeshwar Indrajit Phadtare, Sudhir Chhagan Phadtare, Satish Namdeo Kirdat, Raghunath Tukaram Savant, Vitthal .....
2007 1 Supreme 717 • India - Supreme Court
ARIJIT PASAYAT, LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
In the instant case the trial court has analysed the evidence with care and caution and the High Court has also done so. ... , so far as affirmed by the High Court, do not suffer from any infirmity. ... As a general rule, the substantive evidence of a witness is the statement made in Court. ... It is to be noted that the High Court directed acquittal of A 2 (Vitthal Ramayya Madur) and A 3 (Intakhab Alam Abdul Salam Sain) ... Also identification of the accused through ....
2010 0 Supreme(SC) 559 • India - Supreme Court
SWATANTER KUMAR, B.S.CHAUHAN
, 1963-Section 20 - Refusal of decree for specific performance of contract-Appellants did not bring on record ... show as to what was extent of money currently due to society and for what amount property had been mortgaged in favour of society-Court ... will draw adverse inference against appellants for not producing before Court best available evidence-Courts below decided all material ... One Vitthal Laxman Kankate also applied to the Court, vide Exh. 23, to be impleaded as a party, as he claimed righ....
2020 0 Supreme(SC) 647 • India - Supreme Court
(Paras 1, 10.2, 41-49, 52-58) ... ... (B) Legal Standard - Circumstantial Evidence - In cases ... (Paras 18, 40, 42-52) ... ... (C) Sentencing and Mitigation ... reasonable doubt - The defendant was in custody of the victim, and the forensic evidence and testimonies corroborated the prosecution's case ... Independent witnesses like Shravan, Vitthal Ghodam and Vikas Meshram were not examined. ... On the other hand witnesses such as Shravan, Vitthal Ghodam and Vikas Meshram were not examined at all. .....
2020 0 Supreme(Bom) 718 • India - Bombay
MILIND N.JADHAV
The judgment highlighted the principles of res judicata and its applicability to the case, emphasizing that a fresh round of litigation ... between the same parties and for the same cause of action was not permissible under the same provisions. ... facts and material evidence, and that the order was not based on a correct appreciation of the evidence on record. ... can be more suitably dealt with by a Civil Court, he may in his discretion refuse to exercise the power aforesaid, but sha....
2009 0 Supreme(Bom) 1689 • India - Bombay
B.R.GAVAI
cannot interfere with order passed by Trial Court-Petition dismissed. ... Suit for recovery of possession of property filed against appellant who has acquired possession by virtue of sale agreement-Trial Court ... quashing no cross order on the ground of much delay-Appellant adopting dilatory tactics causing delay in disposal of suit-Writ Court ... Director of Land Records and others" reported in 1994 (Supp) SCC 431 and the judgment of the learned single Judge in the case of ... In this situation, a ten....
2020 0 Supreme(Bom) 13 • India - Bombay
ROHIT B.DEO
C.R. 703 - In light of settled legal position, I have no hesitation in holding that exercise of power U/S. 32 of Act was not within ... period - While Division Bench did observe that what would be the reasonable period may depend on facts and circumstances of each case ... justified - Enunciation of law by the Division Bench is followed in catena of decisions rendered by learned Single Judges of this Court ... The respondents 1 & 2 assert in the affidavit that the application preferred by respondent 4 Vitthal Bajirao Cha....
2025 0 Supreme(Ori) 336 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MANASH RANJAN PATHAK, MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO
(Paras 1, 4, 77-80) ... ... Facts of the case: ... The petitioner ... (A) Writ Petition regarding discrepancies in NEET (UG) application and result - The court examined the OMR sheet and application ... (Paras 3, 5, 77) ... ... Findings of Court: ... The evidence presented by the ... Now this Court feels it apt to summerise the details of records produced before us and upon perusal of the records the findings ... Mane Kshitija Vitthal of Maharashtra.66. ... T....
2016 0 Supreme(Bom) 268 • India - Bombay
A.B.CHAUDHARI
He did not bring any material on records to show that he had ever asked defendant No. 1, the owner of the property, to execute a ... The appellate Court held that the agreement was not entered into by Vitthal since he had never signed the document and it was Bapurao ... The appellant wanted to defend this action by referring to two facts( i) there was an acquisition proceeding over the said land under
2020 0 Supreme(Bom) 107 • India - Bombay
ROHIT B.DEO
Faced with the obstacle posed by the articulation in Vitthal Kondhalkar Vs. State of Maharashtra & others and Bhagwantrao @ Bhagwan @ Bhagwat s/o Mahadu Munjane (since deceased by L.Rs.) Vs. ... State of Maharashtra & others, 2011 (2) ALL MR 335, the learned Single Judge considered the provisions of Section 5(3) of the 1958 Act, in the context of Section 59 of the MLR Code and the enunciation of law in Vitthal Kondhalkar Vs. ... The Division Bench in Vithal Kondhalkar Vs. ... Gangadhar Trimbak Belpatre ....
• India - Bombay High Court - Bench at Aurangabad
Kondhalkar Vs. ... Kondhalkar Vs. ... Kondhalkar Vs. ... of the learned Single Judge invited to the Division Bench decision in Vitthal ... padding:0;top:538pt;left:215pt">Faced with the obstacle posed by the articulation in Vitthal
• India - Bombay
Mhalu Vitthal Shinde Kondhalkar [ supra ] in para no. 19 has observed thus, Vithal Kondhalkar
• India - National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
p>BEFORE: Hon’ble Mr.Justice A.P.Bhangale, PRESIDENT Hon’ble Dr.S.K.Kakade, MEMBER For the Appellant: Adv.Anil Jadhav a/w.Adv.Kondhalkar ... There is also one more MOU dated 11/10/2012 between Ashok Laxman Dalavi and Kishor Madhukarrao Kende regarding the agreement and one more MOU between Vitthal Mahadu Patil and Kishor Madhukarrao Kende. ... CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI FIRST APPEALNO.A/17/730 M/s.Asmita Builders & Developers Through its Proprietor Shri Vitthal ... The complaint was filed by ....
• India - National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Complainant has prayed for amount of Rs.3,00,000/- for mental agony and physical inconvenience to the society bearers and amount of Rs.50,000/- towards costs of litigation. ... Complainant society has also claimed compensation, costs of litigation and refund of amount. It is specifically prayed that opponents be directed to provide necessary amenities as per agreement.[4] Opponents filed written version and opposed adverse allegations. ... [5] Heard learned Counsel Smt.Poonam Makhijani for appellant and Counsel Shri.Shyam Kondhalkar for r....
Filter by Legal Phrase
