This court allowed an intervention application by a resident of a locality as prayed in prayer clause (i). The writ petition was posted for a subsequent hearing.
allowed in terms of the prayer clause (i)
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 748 OF 2006
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 405 OF 2006
SHRI RAWALNATH SAMBHAJI PEDNEKAR, BAINA GOA.
....Applicant
Versus
SHRI JAINATH PAL AND ORS.,
....Respondents
Mr. D. P. Bhise, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. S. G. Dessai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Shivan Dessai, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. S. Padiyar, Advocate for respondent No.1.
Mr. S. S. Kantak, Advocate General with Ms. W. Coutinho, Govt Advocate for respondents No.2, 3 and 4.
Coram:S.K. SHAH & N. A. BRITTO, JJ.
Date:16th January, 2007
P.C.
This is an intervention application by one of the residents in the locality. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has no objection. The application is allowed in terms of the prayer clause (i). Application stands disposed of. The writ petition be posted on 29th January, 2007.
S.K. SHAH, J.
N. A. BRITTO, J.
ssm.
SHRI RAWALNATH SAMBHAJI PEDNEKAR
SHRI JAINATH PAL AND ORS.
S.K. SHAH
N. A. BRITTO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
