Allowed

M/S Hotel Needos Pvt. Ltd, Thr. Its Managind Director Shri Rajeev Jaiswal v. State of Maharashtra, through Ministry of Home and Another

Bombay HC16 Jan 2012CAW/78/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ benched allowed amendment to the main writ petition to add an interim prayer clause and additional grounds, holding that pleas on estoppel and merits must remain open. The Civil Applications were disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Amendment to add interim prayer clause and additional grounds I, J & K was allowed.

What the court decided

M/S Hotel Needos Pvt. Ltd, Thr. Its Managind… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

16.01.12.wp1318.11.odt

¶2

1/2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶4

Writ Petition No.1318/2011

¶5

[M/s. Hotel Needos Private Limited through its Managing Director .vrs. The State of Maharashtra and another]

¶6

..................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders

¶7

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI AND P.D. KODE, JJ.

¶8

DATE : JANUARY 16, 2012.

¶9

CAW No.2992/2011 and CAW No.78/2012

¶10

Heard Shri A.S. Jaiswal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri N.S. Khubalkar, learned A.G.P. for respondent nos.1 and 2.

¶11

Civil Application (W) No.2992/2011 is to add interim prayer clause (C) on the ground that inadvertently it is left out in the main petition. The petitioner also seeks to add grounds “I, J & K” as additional grounds to substantiate his entitlement to the main relief in the petition.

¶12

16.01.12.wp1318.11.odt

¶13

2/2

¶14

By Civil Application (W) No.78/2012, the Circular issued by respondent no.1 on 3.12.2011 and challenge to it is being brought on record.

¶15

Learned A.G.P. is strongly opposing the prayers. According to him, interim prayers or grounds sought to be added by way of amendment run contrary to the pleadings in the petition and licence which is obtained by the petitioner.

¶16

We find that plea of estoppal being raised by the learned A.G.P. pertains to merits of the controversy and those merits are not relevant at this stage. Hence, keeping said challenges and all other contentions open, we allow the amendment. Petition be amended accordingly within one week from today. Liberty to the respondents to file appropriate replyaffidavit within further period of three weeks.

¶17

Both Civil Applications stand disposed of accordingly.

¶18

JUDGE JUDGE

¶19

Gulande

M/S Hotel Needos Pvt. Ltd, Thr. Its Managind Director Shri Rajeev Jaiswal v. State of Maharashtra, through Ministry of Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

M/S Hotel Needos Pvt. Ltd, Thr. Its Managind Director Shri Rajeev Jaiswal v. State of Maharashtra, through Ministry of Home and Another

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

Sumit S/O Marotisingh Bilgaye Vs State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty., and Ors.

Pratap S/O Dhanraj Naikda Vs Chief Executive Officer, Zp, Buldhana and Ors.

Radheshyam S/O Mahadeorao Zade Vs the Nagpur Municipal Corporation, Nagpur and 2 Others

Mushtaq Ahmed Quereshi S/O Abdul Rahman Quereshi and Anr. Vs the Municipal Corp. Amravati Thr Commissioner and Anr.

Vasant S/O Narayan Borkar and Oths Vs Bhandara Distt. Co-Op. Agri. Gramin Multipurpose Dev. Bank Ltd. Thr. Its Manager and Oths

Shri Gajanan S/O Govindrao Dhakate Vs the General Manager (Operation), Ballapur Area, Western Coalfields Ltd.