The applicant moved to restore a writ petition dismissed for failure to deposit conditional costs. The court allowed the application, restoring the petition to file without passing any order as to costs despite the belated and partial deposit.
The writ petition was restored to file with no order as to 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.
1/2 (2)APPW-72-13
Tilak
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.72 of 2013 IN
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITON No.50 of 2012
Prakash Yeshwant Joeel ... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra & ors ... Respondents
Ms.Deepa S. Malwankar i/b Shiva D. Patil, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr.K.V.Saste, APP for the State.
CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND
ABHAY M. THIPSAY, JJ.
DATED : FEBRUARY 25, 2013
P.C.
1 By this application, the applicant seeks restoration of the writ petition which stood dismissed by virtue of the conditional order passed by this Court on 10 October 2012. It appears that the petition has been dismissed for non prosecution on 28 August 2012. The applicant/petitioner had accordingly filed Criminal Application No.525 of 2012, seeking restoration of the said petition.
2/2 (2)APPW-72-13
2 It further appears that this Court, while dealing with the aforesaid Criminal Application had directed the deposit of costs of Rs.10,000/- as a condition for restoration, and has also directed that the receipt evidencing the deposit shall be produced within three weeks from the date of the order.
3 By this application, the applicant seeks the restoration of the writ petition, which therefore, was dismissed because of failure to comply with the condition imposed by this Court by its order dated 10 October 2012.
4 The applicant has annexed a copy of the receipt which shows deposit of Rs.1,000/- on 10 December 2012. The aforesaid deposit is 20 days beyond the date of the order passed by this Court on 10 October 2012.
5 We have heard learned counsel for the parties, and for the reasons stated in the application, application is allowed and the Writ Petition is restored to file with no order as to costs.
( ABHAY M.THIPSAY,J )
(P.V.HARDAS,J)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition dismissed for non-prosecution due to non-payment of conditionally imposed costs can be restored upon a belated partial deposit of costs?
Prakash Yeshwant Joeel
The State of Maharashtra & ors
P.V. Hardas
Abhay M. Thipsay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
