The High Court Bench at Aurangabad disposed of a writ petition made without instructions from the petitioner due to a communication stating the subject premises had been demolished and replaced by a new structure, rendering the matter void.
Rule discharged; Petitioner to be made without further orders; 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.
1 wp 322.92
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 322 OF 1992
Bhaskar Narayan Kshemkalyani .. Petitioner
Versus
Mrs. R. S. Kulkarni, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri A. H. Kasliwal, Advocate for the Respondent No. 3.
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 18TH JANUARY, 2012.
PER COURT :
. After the matter was argued by Mrs. Kulkarni, the learned counsel for the petitioner for some time, the matter was adjourned to the next date i. e. today. Shri Kasliwal, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 produced communication received by him from the respondent No. 3 communicating him that the petitioner left the tented premises long ago and he has sold the same. The transferee has demolished the old structure and new super structure is erected. The said communication is taken on record and marked ‘X’ for identification.
2 wp 322.92
Rule is discharged.
[ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ]
bsb/Jan. 12
Bhaskar Narayan Kshemkalyani
Subhash Chunilal Bora
S. V. GANGAPURWALA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
