In this criminal application, the High Court of Judicature at Bombay examined a judgment where the amount claimed exceeded the advanced sum and compensation amounted to 60% annual interest. The court held the impugned decision was based on sound reasons and dismissed the application.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Cr appln 908-12
smt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 908 OF 2012
Mrs. Jyoti K. Kamath .. Applicant. Vs. Mr. Vaibhav Vishnu Mahamankar and anr. .. Respondents.
Shri Vikram Pai, for the Applicant.
Shri L.R. Castelino i/by Ms. Bidhu Panicker and Ms. Asha Gaikwad, for the Respondent No.1.
Ms. A.A. Mane, APP for the Respondent No.2.
CORAM : A. H. JOSHI, J.
DATED : 7TH OCTOBER, 2013.
1/1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere with the impugned judgment regarding the amount claimed and interest charged.
Mrs. Jyoti K. Kamath
Mr. Vaibhav Vishnu Mahamankar
A. H. JOSHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
