The writ petition was disposed of as infructuous because the petitioner failed to appear, resulting in the discharge of the rule.
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.
wp1257.01\
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Writ Petition No. 1257/2001
Nandlal s/o Sagarmal Agrawal Vs. The Municipal Council, Murtizapur and another.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's or directions and Registrar's orders. Orders.
Mr. Anjan De, Adv. for respondent no.1.
CORAM : P. B.MAJMUDAR & P. B. VARALE, JJ. DATE :8th FEBRUARY, 2012.
None appears for the petitioner when the matter is called out. Today also none appears on behalf of the petitioner.
In view of the above, the petition is disposed of as infructuous. Rule is discharged.
JUDGE JUDGE
Ambulkar
Nandlal s/o Sagarmal Agrawal
The Municipal Council, Murtizapur
another
P. B. MAJMUDAR
P. B. VARALE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
