This judgment dismisses a writ petition without expounding a legal principle. The Court declined interference in the exercise of writ jurisdiction based on possible views taken in the impugned judgment. No substantive legal proposition is articulated.
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 OF BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2062 OF 2009
Shri Ramchandra Kokare. ..Petitioner.
V/s.
Shri Machindra V. Kokare & Ors. ..Respondents.
Mr.K.B.Sonwalkar for petitioner.
CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J
DATE : MARCH 25, 2009.
P.C. :
1. Heard Counsel for the Petitioner.
2. For the reasons mentioned in the impugned
Judgment, in particular, paragraph-4, which is a
possible view, no interference in exercise of writ
jurisdiction is warranted. Hence dismissed.
(A.M.KHANWILKAR,J)
Shri Ramchandra Kokare
Shri Machindra V. Kokare
A.M.Khanwilkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court