Writ petition dismissed for default due to petitioner's non-appearance. Proceeding stated that petitioner was a licensee, not an allottee, and the impugned shop was lawfully demolished.
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 JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
O. O. C. J.
WRIT PETITION NO.810 OF 2007
Sharad Bapu Parkar Petitioner.
Vs.
Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Board and others
..Respondents.
None for the Petitioner.
Mr. K.R. Belosey, Government Pleader for the State.
CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.
22nd October, 2007.
P.C. :
Nobody is present on behalf of the Petitioner. It is stated
on behalf of the Respondents that Respondent No.3 is the allottee
of MHADA, while the Petitioner is only the licensee of Respondent
No.2. The shop in question was demolished in accordance with
law on 25th July, 2006. The Petition is dismissed for default.
CHIEF JUSTICE
DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.
Sharad Bapu Parkar
Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Board
Swatanter Kumar
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
