Single-judge order summarily rejecting writ petition challenging interlocutory order permitting repairs in suit premises under Article 226.
Writ petition rejected summarily and no relief granted.
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.
wp9521-10
spb/ 1
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE
WRIT PETITION NO. 9521 OF 2010
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of
Court's or Judge's Orders
Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
or directions and Registrar's Orders
Mr.Niranjan Mogre i/by S.M.Gorwadkar for the Petitioners.
CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 25th JANUARY, 2011
P.C.:-
1 Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners
2 The writ petition is directed against an interlocutory order, permitting the respondents to carry out tenable repairs in the suit premises. In my view such order requires no interference in exercise of extra -ordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is rejected summarily.
Petitioners
Respondents
D.G. KARNIK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
