Joseph Bain Dsouza and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. and Moreshwar K. Kelkar (Applicant)

Bombay HC9 Oct 2006CHSW/299/2006

Download

Case brief

from the order text

What is this about?

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE…

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.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶2

 ORDINARYORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

 WRIT PETITON NO.3189 OF 2004

¶4

 Joseph Bain D’souza & Ors., ..Petitioners.

¶5

 V/s.

¶6

 State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents.

¶7

 Mr.Gautam Patel i/b.M/s.Thakore Jariwala & Associates
 for petitioners.

¶8

 Mr.J.W.Mattos, A.G.P. for respondent No.1.

¶9

 Mr.S.S.Pakale with Ms.Trupti Puranik with K.K.
 Sanghavi for B.M.C.

¶10

 Mr.Chirag Balsara i/b. Vanita Kakar for applicant
 J.A.Sathe in Chamber Summons No.300 of 2006.

¶11

 Mr.A.N.Jakhadi for applicant M.K.Kelkar in Chamber
 summons No.299 of 2006.

¶12

Joseph Bain Dsouza and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2006)

¶20

 Court. This was as per the directions of the Apex
 Court. Mr.Patel, learned counsel appearing for the
 petitioners has tendered a list of 9 parties who were
 intervenors in the Apex Court, to whom notices have
 been issued. Out of them, a few have appeared through
 their counsel. i.e. Shri Jayant Achyut Sathe
 intervenor No.1 is represented by Mr.Balsara,
 intervenor No.2 Mansukhal P.Sanghvi is represented by
 Mr.Y.M.Chaudhari, intervenor No.3 Mumbai Bhadekari Ekta
 Sangh is represented by Mr.Dharam Sharma and intervenor
 No.7 Rajaram Tukaram Amkar is represented by Mr.Manoj
 Thatte. The other intervenors namely intervenor No.4
 Chandulal Ratilal Doshi, intervenor No.5 Smt.Kalawati
 Hanumanbux Goenka, intervenor No.6 Dhirajlal Amichand
 Shah, Praful Bhagwandas Parikh, Kantilal Prabhudas
 Mehta, Girjalaxmi Kantilal Mehta and Anupam Land &
 Housing Co., intervenor No.8 Sagar Mansion Tenants’
 Association and intervenor No.9 Sharad Tulshiram Sawant
 have not caused their appearance through their counsel.
 Mr.Patel however informs that all of them have been
 sent notices by registered post by the petitioners
 also. Some of them have been served and

¶24

 taken out Chamber Summons No.299 of 2006. Mr.Patel
 appearing for the petitioners has no objection to this
 applicant also being one of the intervenors.
 Accordingly, we grant this Chamber summons and record
 that Mr.A.N.Jakhadi is appearing for this intervenor.

¶25

 3. Thus, some intervenors will have to be
 informed again, inasmuch as, the matter was notified
 today for directions. Now, it will be notified for
 hearing since it has been expedited by the Apex Court
 and it will be notified on 8th November, 2006 at 3.00
 p.m. for hearing. As far as these remaining parties
 are concerned, the office will once again send notices
 by registered post informing them that the matter would
 be appearing for hearing on 8/11/2006 at 3.00 p.m.and
 it will make a report of service on that day.

¶32

 Sathe. Mr.Patel appearing for the petitioners has no
 objection to the chamber summons being allowed and the
 applicant being added as intervenor. Chamber summons
 is accordingly granted. Applicant will be heard as
 intervenor in the petition. The affidavit filed in
 support of the Chamber summons is permitted to be
 relied upon as affidavit of the applicant in support of
 the petition.

Joseph Bain Dsouza and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. and Moreshwar K. Kelkar (Applicant)

Case brief

What is this about?

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sundaram Finance Ltd.and Anr. Vs State of Mah.and Ors.

The Commissioner of Walth-Tax Vs Reliance Comsolidated Enterprises Ltd.

M/S. Nirlon Ltd. Vs Union of India and 3 Ors.

Maimunabai Usman and Anr. Vs Appropriate Authority and Ors.

Joseph Bain Dsouza and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. and Moreshwar K. Kelkar (Applicant)

Case brief

What is this about?

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sundaram Finance Ltd.and Anr. Vs State of Mah.and Ors.

The Commissioner of Walth-Tax Vs Reliance Comsolidated Enterprises Ltd.

M/S. Nirlon Ltd. Vs Union of India and 3 Ors.

Maimunabai Usman and Anr. Vs Appropriate Authority and Ors.

Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority Mumbai Vs Assistant Director of Income-Tax (Exemptions), Circle 1 (1), Mumbai and 2 Ors.

The Commissioner of INCOME-TAX-7 Mumbai Vs M/S. Nova Advertising Palace P. Ltd.