Xlo India Limited v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
CONTINUATION SHEET NO. CONTINUATION SHEET…
A compact analysis
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.
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.22 OF 2005
--------------------------------------------------------Office notes, office : Memoranda of Coram, : appearances, Court’s : Court’s or Judge’s Orders orders or directions : & Registrar’s orders. : . --------------------------------------------------------Mr. R.A. Shaikh for the petitioners. Ms. Ranjana Parikh for respondents.
CORAM: SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J. DATED: 24TH FEBRUARY, 2005.
P.C. :-
Not on board. Mentioned urgently.
The learned counsel for the parties state that the petitioners and the respondents have amicably settled the dispute. They state that respondent 1 - State of Maharashtra is a formal party. The consent term duly signed by Mr. G.M. Kishinchandani, the Director of the petitioners and respondents 2 to 8 and their respective advocates are taken on record and marked ‘X’. The resolution authorising Mr. Kishinchandani to
negotiate
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Petitioners
- respondent
State of Maharashtra (Respondent 1)
- respondent
Respondents 2 to 8
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court