The High Court restored a writ petition to the Single Judge for de novo consideration after the original order was set aside by consent.
Impugned order set aside; writ petition remanded for de novo consideration; leave to amend granted; no costs.
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.
lpa-201-11gr.sxw
1
dgm
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 201 OF 2011
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 2218 OF 2010 ALONG WITH CAL/271/2011
The Administrator, Nashik Dist. Co-op. Agricultural Rural and Bahiddeshiya
.... Appellant
vs
Shri Ramrao Yamaji Aher and anr. .... Respondents
Mr. M.S. Karnik for the Appellant. Mr. V.B. Tapkir for respondent no.1.
CORAM: D. K. DESHMUKH &
ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ.
DATE : October 13, 2011
P.C.:
Admit. Heard finally by consent of parties.
2 By consent, the order dated 23 December 2010 in Writ Petition
No.2218/2010 is set aside. That Writ Petition is remanded back to the
learned Single Judge for de novo consideration and decision in accordance with law. The Petitioner in Writ Petition No.2218/2010 is
lpa-201-11gr.sxw
2
granted leave to amend that writ petition. The Appeal is disposed of
in the above terms. No costs.
(ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)
(D. K. DESHMUKH,J.)
The Administrator, Nashik Dist. Co-op. Agricultural Rural and Bahiddeshiya
Shri Ramrao Yamaji Aher
D. K. DESHMUKH
ANOOP V. MOHTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
