The Single Judge dismissed two writ petitions. Relying on concurrent findings of fact, the court held that no interference in the exercise of writ jurisdiction was 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO 7726 OF 2003 AND WRIT PETITION NO 7665 OF 2003
Bhalchandra Baburao Diwan (since deceased)
Shashikala Bhalchandra Diwan & Ors
.. Petitioners
V/s.
Arjun Vadumal Thakaral & Ano
.. Respondents
Mr. P.B. Shah for Petitioners
Mr. Umesh R. Mankapure for Respondent No. 2
CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR, J DATE : 03rd February, 2009
P.C.
(A.M. KHANWILKAR, J)
1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be allowed given concurrent findings of fact.
Shashikala Bhalchandra Diwan
Arjun Vadumal Thakaral
A.M. KHANWILKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
