Allowed

Hutatma Veerbhai Kotwal Tapoari Vyapari Association and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC1 Aug 2007CAI/25/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court allowed Hutatma Veerbhai Kotwal Tapari Vyapari Association to intervene in PIL No.30 of 2006. Additionally, the petition for leave to join Zilla Parishad, Raigad District, as a respondent was granted with time limits for amendment and notice.

What did the court decide?

Intervention of the Applicants permitted; Leave to join Zilla Parishad, Raigad, granted; C.A. disposed of.

Hutatma Veerbhai Kotwal Tapoari Vyapari… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.25 OF 2007
 IN
 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.30 OF 2006
 WITH
 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.30 OF 2006

¶4

 Shri Madhavrao Dattatraya
 Gaikwad .. Petitioner
 Vs.

¶5

 The State of Maharashtra & Ors .. Respondents
 And

¶6

 Hutatma Veerbhai kotwal Tapoari
 Vyapari Association & Ors. .. Applicants

¶7

 Mr.P.S.Patil for the petitioner

¶8

 Mr.P.V.Hardas for the Applicants

¶9

 Mr.S.R.Nargolkar, A.G.P. for the respondents

¶10

 CORAM : J.N.PATEL &
 A.A.SAYED, JJ.
DATED : 1ST AUGUST, 2007

¶11

 P.C.:

¶12

 1. The applicants in the Civil Application are
 office bearers / members of respondent no.1 Hutatma
 Veerbhai Kotwal Tapari Vyapari Association. There
 are 96 members of respondent no.1 Association who
 own small tenaments / taparies of approx. 5 x 10

¶13

¶14

 ft.and carrying on their small business therefrom.

¶15

 The applicants have taken out this C.A. to
 intervene in the above matter as according to them,
 any orders passed in the above petition is going to
 vitally affect them.

¶16

 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the

¶17

 parties and are satisfied that this is a fit case
 where intervention by the Applicants can be allowed
 and we permit the applicants to intervene in the
 above petition. The C.A. is disposed of
 accordingly.

¶18

 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner
 seeks leave to join the C.E.O. Zilla Parishad,
 Raigad District as party respondent. Leave
 granted. Amendment to be carried out within 2
 weeks. Notice to proposed respondents, returnable
 in 4 weeks. Hamdast allowed.

¶19

 4. List petition for admission after 4 weeks.

¶20

 ( J.N. PATEL, J )

¶21

¶22

 ( A.A. SAYED, J )

Hutatma Veerbhai Kotwal Tapoari Vyapari Association and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hutatma Veerbhai Kotwal Tapoari Vyapari Association and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Principal-K.I.Ts College of Engineering and Anr. Vs Yashwant Ramchandra Gaikwad and Ors.

Shri. Kamlesh Arjan Khubchandani Vs Smt. Rani Kamlesh Khubchandani (Nee Rani Kishinchand Vaswani)

Govindlal Narayan Mehta Vs Bajaj Tempo Limited

Subhash Gunaji Shrigondekar Vs Seema Subhash Shrigondekar

Ms. Nalini Vasant Dharurkar Vs 1. Smt. Swati Ganesh Godbole and Anr.

The United India Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Usha Kumarpal Shah and Ors.