Disposed

Nilesh S/O Rameshchandra Baheti and 3 Others v. Shri Kamalkishore S/O Bulchand Baheti and 3 Others

Bombay HC9 Aug 2012CAZ/398/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

During pendency of Letters Patent Appeal, court noted appellants undertaking not to alienate property. Related civil applications disposed of; one allowed pursuant to previous order.

What did the court decide?

Civil Application No. 198 of 2012 allowed pursuant to previous order; Civil Application No. 398 of 2012 disposed of as not pressed.

Nilesh S/O Rameshchandra Baheti and 3 Others… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶3

L.P.A.NO.152 of 2012 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1208 of 2012 (D).

¶4

Nilesh Ramchandra Baheti and others.

¶5

..vs..

¶6

Kamalkishor Fulchand Baheti and others.

¶7

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

¶8

Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram Court's or Judges Order appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders.

¶9

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

¶10

Mr.A.C.Dharmadhikari, Adv. for the appellants.

¶11

Mr.M.G.Sarda, Advocate for respondent no.1. Mr.Anuj Hazare h/f Mr.R.V.Shiralkar, Adv. for resp.No.2.

¶12

Mr.S.V.Purohit Adv. for respondent no.3.

¶13

C ORAM: P.V.HARDAS AND

¶14

M.L.TAHALIYANI, JJ. DATE : 9th AUGUST, 2012.

¶15

Heard Mr.Ashutosh Dharmadhikari, learned counsel for the

¶16

appellant.

¶17

Admit .

¶18

Advocate Mr.Sarda accepts notice of admission of Letters Patent

¶19

Appeal on behalf of respondent no.1.

¶20

Advocate Mr.R.V.Shiralkar accepts notice of admission of Letters

¶21

Patent Appeal on behalf of respondent no.2.

¶22

Advocate Mr.S.V.Purohit accepts notice of admission of Letters Patent Appeal on behalf of respondent no.3.

¶23

¶24

During the pendency of this Letters Patent Appeal, an interim relief granted earlier to continue.

¶25

Shri Ashutosh Dharmadhikari, learned counsel for the appellants states, on instructions of the appellants, that during the pendency of this LPA, the appellants would not create any third party interest nor alienate the properties, which are subject-matter of the dispute in the present LPA.

¶26

Civil Application (CAZ) No.398 of 2012.

¶27

Learned counsel for the applicant/respondent no.1 states, on instructions, that the applicant does not press the relief prayed in this application. This application is accordingly disposed of as not pressed.

¶28

Civil Application (CAZ) No.198 of 2012.

¶29

This Civil Application is allowed in terms of the order which is already passed by us.

¶30

JUDGE JUDGE.

¶31

chute

¶32

Nilesh S/O Rameshchandra Baheti and 3 Others v. Shri Kamalkishore S/O Bulchand Baheti and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nilesh S/O Rameshchandra Baheti and 3 Others v. Shri Kamalkishore S/O Bulchand Baheti and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammad Shafique Mohammad Yakub @ Shafique Raja Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Secretary of Home Deptt. and Others

Mrs. Vaishali W/O Vijaykumar Wakase Vs Gitaram S/O Laxman Shewale and One

Laxman S/O Ganpat Khade Vs the State of Maharashtra through Pso Ps Asegaon Distt Washim and Others

Nilesh S/O Rameshchandra Baheti and 3 Others Vs Shri Kamalkishore S/O Bulchand Baheti and 3 Others

Bahuudeshiya Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Uva Sanstha Thr. Its President Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty. and Ors.

Padmanabh S/O Gajrajsingh Thakur Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty., and Anr.