Disposed

Chandrakant Dehu Bhagat v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC4 Sept 2007CAF/3844/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a pending civil application without adjudicating merits, granting the prayers. The appeal was placed for admission after registration as no satisfied decision was reached on the underlying grievance regarding solatium and interest.

What did the court decide?

The civil application disposed of by granting prayer clauses (a) and (b). Appeal placed for admission after registration; no observation on merits made.

Chandrakant Dehu Bhagat Vs the State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

ssm

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3844 OF 2007

¶5

IN

¶6

FIRST APPEAL (ST) No. 16091 OF 2007

¶7

Shri Chandrakant Dehu Bhagat...Applicant.

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The State of Maharashtra...Respondents.

¶10

Mr. R.P. Lote for the applicant.

¶11

Mrs. Usha Kejariwal, AGP for the respondents.

¶12

CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.

¶13

DATED : 4th September, 2007

¶14

P.C.

¶15

1. The appellant being aggrieved by the judgment
dated 12th January, 2000 passed by the Additional
District Judge, Raigad on the restricted ground of
non-granting of solatium and interest amount so
granted, moved an application under Section 152 of
C.P.C.. However, by order dated 6th October, 2004 the
learned Judge, dismissed the said application with
observation that the appellant is at liberty to file
Review Application.

¶16

2. The appellant, therefore, moved a Review

¶17

application. The learned judge, however, by an order

¶18

( 2 )

¶19

dated 7th January, 2006 rejected the said review
application.

¶20

3. The appellant, therefore, preferred the writ
petition which was disposed of on 13th June, 2007 with
observation to adopt appropriate proceedings in
accordance with law.

¶21

4. The appellant, therefore, preferred the present
first appeal, alongwith Civil Application for
condonation of delay dated 19th July, 2007.

¶22

5. Considering the above facts and circumstances,
wherein the appellant has moved from court to court
for redressal of his grievance, therefore, without
considering or making any observation on the merit of
the matter, I am inclined to grant the application in
terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b).

¶23

6. The Civil Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶24

7. Appeal be placed for admission after due

¶25

registration.

¶26

(ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)

Chandrakant Dehu Bhagat v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrakant Dehu Bhagat v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Babubhai Ladkabhai Bawisha Vs Lalji Agarwal and Others

Bhagwan Rangu Jadhav Vs Shri Manihar Devanand Kotiyan

Lalji Agarwal Vs Namiben Ladka Bawisha and Ors.

M/S. V.M. Sancheti and Co. and Ors. Vs Dr. Shashikant Shankar Vaidya (Decd.) by His Lrs. 1. Smt. Meera Shashikant Vaidya and Ors.

M/S.Fixity Packaging Indutries Pvt. Ltd. Vs Uco Bank

Prabhakar Engineers Pvt.Ltd. Vs the Employees State Insurance Corporation and Anr.