Dismissed

Balasaheb Shankar Malekar and Ors. v. Alka Kakasaheb Malekar and Ors.

Bombay HC26 Apr 2010WP/2868/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition regarding the appointment of a Survey Officer as Court Commissioner under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, the court held that no interference is called for as the impugned order is interlocutory, its report is not conclusive, and objections can be raised during appeal.

What did the court decide?

No interference with the imugned order; writ petition disposed of.

Balasaheb Shankar Malekar and Ors. Vs Alka Kakasaheb Malekar… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

Ash

¶3

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2868 OF 2010

¶4

Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions & Registrar’s orders.

¶5

Court’s or Judge’s orders.

¶6

Shri P.B. Gujar for the Petitioners.

¶7

CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 26TH APRIL, 2010

¶8

P.C.:

¶9

. By the impugned order, a Survey Officer under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 has been appointed as the Court Commissioner. Apart from the fact that the order is purely interlocutory in nature which is capable of being challenged in an appeal, the report of the Court Commissioner is never conclusive, in the sense that the parties can always raise an objection to the said report and can apply to the Court for examining the Court Commissioner on oath.

¶10

At this stage, no interference is called for. Subject to what is observed above, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶11

(A.S.OKA, J)

Balasaheb Shankar Malekar and Ors. v. Alka Kakasaheb Malekar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balasaheb Shankar Malekar and Ors. v. Alka Kakasaheb Malekar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harshavardhan Dharnendra Maraje and Ors. Vs Dharnendra Surendra Maraje and Ors.

Gundu Bhau Kunkekar Vs Kerba Bhau Kunkekar

Uttam Jagannath Lanjekar Vs the Assistant Engineer and Ors.

Shri Sadashiv Hari Vyangankar Vs Shri Sanjay Gopinath Pokade and Anr.

Amit Shamsadan Painter through Guardian Kalpana Shamsadan Painter Vs Indian Audit and Account Department and Ors.

Pradeep Pralhad Sardesai Vs Govind Ramkisan Sarda