This judgment dismisses multiple civil applications filed as appeals from writ petitions wherein interlocutory orders were granted in terms of prayer clauses.
Interim orders allowed to continue; civil applications disposed of.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1356 OF 2002
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.873 OF 1991
Shri Hasan Y. Hussain .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents.
Mr.Parikh with Ms.Pramila Shah for applicant.
CORAM : A.P.SHAH AND
S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, JJ.
DATE : 12TH OCTOBER 2004.
P.C.
1. Heard Advocates. C.A. is granted in
terms of prayer clause (a). Interim orders to
continue. C.A. disposed of accordingly.
*****
2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2071 OF 2002
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.879 OF 1991
Ramesh T. Gujar .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents.
Mr.Parikh with Ms.Pramila Shah for applicant.
CORAM : A.P.SHAH AND
S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, JJ.
DATE : 12TH OCTOBER 2004.
P.C.
1. Heard Advocates. C.A. is granted in
terms of prayer clause (a). Interim orders to
continue. C.A. disposed of accordingly.
*****
3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1363 OF 2002
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.882 OF 1991
Abdul H. Rehman .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents.
Mr.Parikh with Ms.Pramila Shah for applicant.
CORAM : A.P.SHAH AND
S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, JJ.
DATE : 4TH OCTOBER 2004.
P.C.
1. Heard Advocates. C.A. is granted in
terms of prayer clause (a). Interim orders to
continue. C.A. disposed of accordingly.
*****
4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1374 OF 2002
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.899 OF 1991
Gulam H. Abdul Hussain .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents.
Mr.Parikh with Ms.Pramila Shah for applicant.
CORAM : A.P.SHAH AND
S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, JJ.
DATE : 12TH OCTOBER 2004.
P.C.
1. Heard Advocates. C.A. is granted in
terms of prayer clause (a). Interim orders to
continue. C.A. disposed of accordingly.
*****
5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1371 OF 2002
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.892 OF 1991
Abdul Ibrahim Theba .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents.
Mr.Parikh with Ms.Pramila Shah for applicant.
CORAM : A.P.SHAH AND
S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, JJ.
DATE : 12TH OCTOBER 2004.
P.C.
1. Heard Advocates. C.A. is granted in
terms of prayer clause (a). Interim orders to
6
continue. C.A. disposed of accordingly.
*****
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1358 OF 2002
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.875 OF 1991
Shri H.H.Shrihari Vishwakarma .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents.
Mr.Parikh with Ms.Pramila Shah for applicant.
CORAM : A.P.SHAH AND
S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, JJ.
DATE : 12TH OCTOBER 2004.
P.C.
1. Heard Advocates. C.A. is granted in
terms of prayer clause (a). Interim orders to
7
continue. C.A. disposed of accordingly.
*****
Shri Hasan Y. Hussain
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
A.P.SHAH
S.C.DHARMADHIKARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court