The court allowed an application to cancel bailable warrants issued against applicants for non-appearance in a contempt petition, as they now appeared with counsel.
Bailable warrants cancelled; application allowed and disposed of.
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 CA-29-10.sxw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Mhi
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 29 OF 2010 in CONTEMPT PETITINO NO.391 OF 2009
Deelip Balasaheb patil (Kaulavkar) & Anr. .. Applicants
(Orig.Respdts.Nos. 2& 3)
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respndents
Mr. S.S.Kanetkar, Advocate, for the applicants.
CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 24th September, 2010.
P.C.
against respondent Nos. 2 and 3 as they had failed to appear inspite of service. Now they have appeared and are represented by an Advocate. Therefore, the Application is allowed. The Bailable Warrants stand cancelled.
Application stands disposed of.
(J.H.BHATIA,J.)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Deelip Balasaheb Patil (Kaulavkar) & Anr.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
J.H. BHATIA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
