Single judge dismissed a writ petition challenging a discretionary interlocutory order, holding that writ jurisdiction was not warranted.
Writ petition dismissed as no interference warranted.
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.
Lsp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1874 of 2009 Rajkumar P. Somani & anr. ...Petitioner v/s. Jaykumar R. Agarwal & ors. ...Respondents Mr. M.M.Sathye for the petitioner. Mr. Sagar Kasar for respondents 1 to 4. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. DATED : MARCH 18, 2009 P.C. . Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. The order impugned in this Petition being discretionary order and having been passed at the interlocutory stage, no interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction is warranted. Dismissed.
[A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.]
Rajkumar P. Somani & anr.
Jaykumar R. Agarwal & ors.
A.M.KHANWILKAR,J
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
