This short order declares the issue covered by a Supreme Court judgment via an earlier Bombay case. The court makes the rule absolute dismissing the writ petition without costs.
, Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b).
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 NO.873 OF 1999
Apple Finance Limited and
Anr. ..Petitioners
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
& Ors. ..Respondents
Mr.F.Pooniwala i/b Kanga & Co. for Petitioners
Mr.R.J.Mane AGP for Respondent-State.
CORAM: DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND
SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ.
DATE : NOVEMBER 20, 2006
P.C.
1. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners
and the learned A.G.P. for the Respondent-State.
Both the learned counsel for the Petitioners and
learned A.G.P. for the Respondent-State
categorically state that the issue involved in the
above petition is squarely covered by the judgment
of the Supreme Court in ICICI Vs. State of
Maharashtra; 2000 (1) Bom.C.R.35, in favour of the
Petitioners. Under these circumstances, Rule is
made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and
(b). However, no order as to costs.
[DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]
[SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
ICICI vs State of MaharashtraReferred¶9
ICICI Vs. State of Maharashtra; 2000 (1) Bom.C.R.35 · Who else cites this
Apple Finance Limited
The State of Maharashtra
S.Radhakrishnan
V.K.Tahilramani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court