The High Court of Bombay dismissed the writ petition in a short order. It held that since a statutory appeal before the Slum Tribunal was available to the petitioner, the petition was ineffective.
Petition dismissed; petitioners allowed to prefer statutory appeal.
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
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 932 OF 2006
Mr. Aspandiar Rashid Irani & Anr. .... Petitioner
Vs.
Mr.P.L. Salve ... Respondents
Mr. A.Y. Sakhare, Sr. Advocate with Mr. D.S.
Mahispurkar for Petitioner.
Mr. M. More, A.G.P. for R. Nos. 1 and 2.
CORAM: F.I.REBELLO&
MRS.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ.
DATE : 06TH JULY, 2006
P.C.:
. On behalf of the Respondent, the learned A.G.P.
makes a statement that the statutory appeal before
the Slum Tribunal is available to the Petitioner.
In the light of that the Petitioner has efficacious
remedy available at law, Petition dismissed. It
will be open to the Petitioners to prefer the
appeal. The respondents agree that if there be any
delay in taking out the appeal, they will not take
objection for the delay but argue the matter on
merits. Statement accepted. The statement is made
based on information received from the Deputy
Collector,Mr. Gangurde.
. We make it clear that that we have not decided
the merits of the case.
2
(MRS.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)(F.I.REBELLO,J.)
Mr. Aspandiar Rashid Irani & Anr.
Mr. P.L. Salve
F.I. Rebello
V.K. Taubilramani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court