The High Court of Bombay dismissed the applicant's request for adjournment but allowed the civil application to proceed consistently with the prayer clause in the interest of justice.
Application allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), restored to proceed on 14.3.2013.
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.
vss
cai.45.2013.sxw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.45 OF 2013 IN
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.59 OF 2012
Shivaji T. Kshirsagar ... Applicant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .... Respondents
Mr.Ashish Gaikwad for the Applicant Ms.M.P. Thakur, A.G.P., for the Respondent No.1 Mr.S.M. Gorwadkar for Resp. No.10
CORAM: A.M. KHANWILKAR & A.P. BHANGALE, JJ.
DATED: 5.3.2013
P.C.:
1. Although the explanation offered in the application is not
acceptable, however, as the litigant should not suffer for the mistake of the advocate, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), in
the interest of justice. This indulgence is shown on condition that no request for adjournment or keeping back the matter at the instance of the petitioner will be entertained on any count on future dates.
(A.P. BHANGALE, J.) (A.M. KHANWILKAR,J.)
vss 1 of 1
Shivaji T. Kshirsagar
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
A.M. Khanwilkar
A.P. Bhangale
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
