The petitioner grievenced Respondent 3's non-cooperation in a pending appeal before the School Tribunal. The Court held that writs cannot compel such parties and the Tribunal can summon them. The petition was dismissed.
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 BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.4172 OF 2008
Smita Madhukar Joshi. .. Petitioner.
vs.
Sudhagad Education Society
& Ors. .. Respondents.
Mrs. Anita A. Agarwal for Petitioner.
Mr. V.P. Malvankar, AGP., for Respondent/State.
CORAM: J.N. PATEL, &
S.J. KATHAWALLA, JJ.
DATE: 1ST DECEMBER, 2008.
P.C.
. The petitioner has come with a grievance that
the respondent no. 3 is not cooperating in the matter
of Appeal No. 23 of 2007 pending before the School
Tribunal at Pune. In our view such a writ cannot be
issued by this Court to the parties in appeal who do
not cooperate. The School Tribunal can draw necessary
inference and if required summon the parties to produce
documents as the School Tribunal exercises all powers
vested in a court under the Code of Civil Procedure for
the said purpose.
2
2. With these observations, the petition is
dismissed.
(J.N. Patel, J.)
(S.J. Kathawalla, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether this Court can issue a writ to compel a party in a pending appeal to cooperate with the School Tribunal.
Smita Madhukar Joshi
Sudhagad Education Society
Ors.
J.N. PATEL
S.J. KATHAWALLA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court