Allowed

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. v. Tukaram Bhagwanta Debre and Ors.

Bombay HC25 Nov 2009RA/194/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay allowed a review application. It recalled an earlier order that had withdrawn a writ petition as settled. The court found the settlement undertaking was given inadvertently and permitted the withdrawal of that statement, directing the petitioner list for admission.

What did the court decide?

Review application allowed; previous settlement statement withdrawn; writ petition listed for admission.

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. Vs Tukaram Bhagwanta… — Cooperative Societies | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

{1}

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

REVIEW APPLICATION NO.194 OF 2009

¶4

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.4928 OF 2009

¶6

The State of Maharashtra & others APPLICANTS

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Tukaram Bhagwanta Debre & others

¶9

RESPONDENTS

¶10

Mr.S.V.Kurundkar, Addl.G.P. for applicants Mr.N.V.Gaware, Advocate for applicant No.1 to 4 Mr.A.K.Tiwari, Advocate for respondent No.5

¶11

[CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, and A.V.POTDAR, J.J.]

¶12

DATE :25^th November 2009

¶13

PER COURT:

¶14

This review application has been filed in Writ Petition No.4928/2009, which came to be disposed of by us, by order dated 5^th October 2009. When this matter had been listed before us (P.V.Hardas, J. & A.V.Potdar, J.), on 5^th October 2009, learned AGP, on instructions had stated that election of respondent No.5 cooperative society would be conducted in accordance with the amended bye laws. In that light of the statement, therefore,

¶15

{2}

¶16

Mr.N.V.Gaware, learned counsel, who represented the petitioners in that petition, had sought to withdraw the aforesaid writ petition. This Court had accepted the aforesaid statement made by the learned AGP, on behalf of the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Shrigonda, Dist-Ahmednagar, as an undertaking and dismissed the petition as withdrawn.

¶17

By this review application, therefore, learned AGP states that the aforesaid statement was made inadvertently by the respondents to the petition and, therefore, seeks to withdraw the aforesaid statement.

¶18

We have heard Mr.Kurundkar, learned AGP on behalf of the applicants, Mr.N.V.Gaware, learned counsel, who represented the respondents, original petitioners and Mr.A.K.Tiwari, learned counsel who appears for respondent No.5 society. For the reasons stated in the review application, we allow this review application and permit the learned AGP to withdraw the aforesaid statement. Consequently, we recall our order dated 5^th October 2009 and direct that the petition be listed before the Regular Court for admission.

¶19

[A.V.POTDAR, J.]

¶20

drp/RA194-09

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. v. Tukaram Bhagwanta Debre and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. v. Tukaram Bhagwanta Debre and 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

The State of Mah and Ors. Vs Umesh Madhavrao Adbalwad and Ors.

Yeshodabai W/O. Dattatraya Mule Vs the State of Mah. and Anr.

Ramesh Jadhav Patel Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Kailas Baliram Sawale Vs the State of Mah

Pandurang S/O.Baliram Sawale Vs the Stae of Maharashtra

Santosh Baburao Bagal and Ors. Vs State of Mah