The petition was disposed of as the respondent Corporation indicated it would not pursue the claim against the petitioner but would instead claim the amount from the Air Port Authority.
Petition disposed of; rule discharged; 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.
wp3396.99
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Writ Petition No. 3396/1995 Union of India Vs. MunicipalCommissioner
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's or directions and Registrar's orders. Orders.
Mr. R.S. Sundaram, Adv. for the petitioner. Mr. C. S. Kaptan, Adv. for the respondent.
Learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation states that the respondent will proceed to claim amount from the Air Port Authority and not from the petitionerUnion of India. Since the Corporation is not willing to pursue the matter against the petitioner and proceed to claim the amount from the Air Port Authority, the grievance raised by the petitioner does not survive. It will open to the Corporation to pursue the claim from the Air Port Authority.
In view of above, the petition is disposed of. Rule is discharged. No costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Ambulkar
Union of India
Municipal Commissioner
Ambulkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
