Dismissed

Ketan Tirodkar v. Hon'Ble High Court, Registrar General and Anr.

Bombay HC1 Feb 2012WP/506/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner in person sought leave to withdraw an affidavit lacking a Notary Public signature and to withdraw the criminal writ petition to file a fresh one challenging land allotment to a housing society. The Court granted permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a fresh one and disposed of the matter.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to withdraw affidavit and petition with liberty to file fresh petition challenging land allotment.

Ketan Tirodkar Vs Hon'Ble High Court, Registrar General… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2012)

gopi

cr.w.p.506-11

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY.

¶5

APPELLATE SIDE, CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

¶6

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.506 OF 2011 WITH

¶7

CRIMINAL APPICATION NO.131 OF 2011

Ketan Tirodkar

.Petitioner

V/s.

Registrar General, Bombay High Court & Ors.

¶12

...Respondents.

¶13

Mr. Ketan Tirodkar petitioner in person present. Mr. D.J. Khambata, Additional Solicitor General along with Mr. M.S. Karnik, for respondent No.1.

¶14

Mr. V.R. Dhond, Senior Advocate along with Mr. P.A. Pol, PP for respondent No.2.

¶15

Mr. I.M. Chagla, Senior Advocate along with Mr. J.P. Adasia and Mr. Zal Andhyarujina i/b. M/s. Dastur Dadhich & Kalambi for respondent No.3.

¶16

Mr. Rafiq Dada, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Amit Desai, Senior Advocate and Mr. C. Rashmikant, Solicitor i/b. M/s.Federal & Rashmikant for Siddhant Co-op. Housing Society Respondent No.4.

¶17

CORAM: MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & RANJIT V. MORE, J.

¶18

DATED : 01 February 2012.

¶19

P.C.

¶20

Mr. Ketan Tirodkar. Petitioner, party in person, seeks leave to withdraw the affidavit which was purported to have been signed before Notary Public but which does not bear the signature of the Notary Public. The said document is accordingly returned to the

gopi

cr.w.p.506-11

petitioner, party in person.

¶25

Mr. Tirodkar further states that his grievance is that the contentions raised by the petitioner have not been properly set out in the memo of the present petition and, therefore, the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a fresh petition confining the challenge to the allotment of land to Nyay Sagar Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., on the ground that the Government resolution dated 22 June 2004 allotting the land to the Nyay Sagar Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., was illegal.

¶26

Permission as prayed for is granted. The petition is accordingly permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to challenge the allotment of land to Nyay Sagar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., by Government resolution dated 22 June, 2004 on the ground that the said resolution is illegal.

¶27

4. Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶28

In view of the withdrawal of the petition, the Criminal Application does not survive. The Criminal Application is accordingly disposed of.

¶29

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶30

(RANJIT V. MORE, J.)

Ketan Tirodkar v. Hon'Ble High Court, Registrar General and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ketan Tirodkar v. Hon'Ble High Court, Registrar General and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Skol Breweries Ltd. Vs M.P. Beer Products Pvt. Ltd.

Citispace and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Anand Prabhakar Joshi Vs Civil Court and Ors.

M/S. Earth Builders Vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 3 Ors.

Ashish Enterprises Vs M/S. Rajesh Estates and Nirman Ltd.

M/S. Gupta Synthetics Limited Vs SBI Global Factors Ltd.(Formerly Known as M/S/ Global Trade Finance Ltd)