The court refused to entertain the writ petition against private respondents, holding that an alternate civil suit is available. The matter was rejected on this ground.
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.
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE
WRIT PETITION NO.2285 OF 2009
------------------------------------:----------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of : Court’s or Judge’s orders.
coram, appearances, Court’s orders :
or directions and Registrar’s :
orders. :
------------------------------------:-----------------------------------
Mr B.B.Gupta, for the petitioner.
CORAM: S.B.MHASE & D.B.BHOSALE,JJ.
DATED: 16.03.2009.
P.C.:
Heard learned counsel for the
petitioner.
The petitioner has an alternate remedy
to file a civil suit as against respondent
nos 3 to 6. A writ cannot be issued as
against the private individuals. We,
therefore, refrain from entertaining this
petition. The petition is rejected.
(D.B.BHOSALE,J.) (S.B.MHASE,J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should issue a writ against private individuals when an alternate civil remedy exists.
Whether a writ petition is maintainable against private individuals.
Petitioner
Respondents 3 to 6
S.B.Mhase
D.B.Bhosale
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court