Disposed

Amit Mahendra Gokani v. State of Maharashtra and 5 Ors.

Bombay HC13 Aug 2007CHSW/242/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This chamber summons order addresses the objection by proposed respondent No. 4B regarding party status without examining merits. The court makes the summons absolute, orders 4B to be impleaded, allows amendments, and grants time to file a reply affidavit.

What did the court decide?

Chamber summons made absolute; Respondent No. 4B impleaded; Amendments allowed; Time granted for reply affidavit.

Amit Mahendra Gokani Vs State of Maharashtra… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

 -: 1 :-

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

 CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 242 OF 2007
 IN

¶5

 WRIT PETITION NO. 695 OF 2007

¶6

 Amit Mahendra Gokani... ... Petitioner.
 Versus
 State of Maharashtra & Ors... ... Respondents.

¶7

 Mr. O.J.Menezes i/by Mr. Chacko Joseph
 for the Petitioner.
 Mrs. S.M.Dandekar, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3.
 Mr. Sanjay Jain i/by Mr. B.V.Bukhari
 for Respondent No.4.
 Mr. J.B.Chinani, Sr. Advocate i/by M/s. L.J.Law
 for Respondent No.4B.

¶8

CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. &
DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.

¶9

DATED : 13TH AUGUST, 2007.

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

 This chamber summons is opposed, on behalf of the
 proposed respondent no.4B, on the ground that on the
 own showing of the petitioner the said respondent is
 not a necessary party.

¶12

 2. Be that as it may, it is not necessary for us to
 examine the merits of the contentions raised. The
 same is subject to explanation and without prejudice
 to the rights and contentions of the respondent no.4B

¶13

 -: 2 :-

¶14

 including the contention that the writ petition is not
 maintainable. The chamber summons is made absolute in
 terms of prayer clause (a).

¶15

 3. The respondent no.4B be impleaded as party
 respondent to the writ petition. Amendments as prayed
 be carried out within one week from today.

¶16

 4. Learned Counsel appearing for respondent no.4B
 prays for time to file reply affidavit. The same be
 filed within two weeks from today.

¶17

 5. S. O. to 3rd September, 2007.

¶18

 Sd/-

¶19

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶20

 Sd/-

¶21

DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.

Amit Mahendra Gokani v. State of Maharashtra and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Mahendra Gokani v. State of Maharashtra and 5 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

Association of Managements of Unaided Private Medical and Dental Colleges and Anr. Vs Parents Association of Medical Students, Maharashtra and Ors.

Smt. Jyotsna Rohekar Vs Dr. N. Vijayaditya and Ors.

M/S Cine Trade Exhibitors Vs State of Maharashtra and 3 Ors.

Mr Abdul Sattar Haji Gani and 4 Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and 5 Ors.

Jayshree W/O Late Shri Vilas Ramchandra Deo Vs State of Maharshtra and 2 Ors.

Suresh Estates Pvt. Ltd. and 2 Ors. Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 4 Ors.