The Bombay High Court held that the Letter Patent Appeal was not maintainable due to amended Code provisions. The appeal was dismissed, and a related Civil Application was disposed of after condoning delay.
Appeal dismissed as not maintainable under amended Code; Civil Application 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
L.P.A.Stamp No.17608 of 2004
in
First Appeal No.1965 of 2003
1. Taher & Co. and anr. ..Appellants
vs.
1. M/s Harsha and others ..Respondents
Ms.R.P.Safari for appellants.
CORAM: A.P.SHAH
&S.U.KAMDAR JJ.
13th August,2004
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel.
2. L.P.A. is not maintainable in view of the
amended provisions of the Code. Appeal is
dismissed.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Civil Application No.311 of 2004
in
L.P.A.Stamp No.17608 of 2004
in
First Appeal No.1965 of 2003
1. Taher & Co. and anr. ..Appellants
vs.
1. M/s Harsha and others ..Respondents
Ms.R.P.Safari for appellants.
CORAM: A.P.SHAH
&S.U.KAMDAR JJ.
13th August,2004
P.C.
1. Heard Advocate.
2. Delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
3. C.A.disposed of accordingly
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a Letters Patent Appeal is maintainable under the amended provisions of the Code.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Taher & Co. and anr.
M/s Harsha and others
A.P.SHAH
S.U.KAMDAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court