The High Court of Judicature at Bombay allowed a motion in an LCSuit. The motion restored the part of the suit pertaining to the plaintiff's prayer clauses for hearing.
The prayer clauses of the suit shall be placed for hearing as per its turn.
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 B |
OMBAY |
|---|---|---|---|
| ORDINARY ORIGINAL |
CIVIL | JURIS | DICTION |
| NOTICE OF MOTION IN L.C.SUIT NO.3450 |
NO. 664 OF |
OF |
2007 1991 |
| Arya Chanakya Nagar Coop Hsg.Scty Ltd .. Plaintiff vs |
Govind | Madhav | |
| Mrs.Sunanda Eknath Joshi & |
ors.. | D | efendants |
| Ms Manisha Poladia i.b M.H |
.& Co |
for | Plaintiff |
| Ms.Sangita Patel h/f Atul |
Damale for |
Deft | no.3 |
| CORAM : |
A.M.KHAN | WILKAR, | J |
| DATE : |
28th | March, | 2007 |
| P.C. | |||
| 1. By consent, motion is prayer clauses (a). Suit which is restored to file |
allowed in |
terms | of |
| shall be placed for hearing as per its turn. |
(A.M.Khanwilkar, J)
Govind Madhav Joshi
Mrs. Sunanda Eknath Joshi
Ms. Manisha Poladia i.b. M.H.& Co
Ms. Sangita Patel h/f Atul Damale
A.M. Khanwilkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
