Smt. Sandhya Shsekar Pavaskar v. Shri Sunil Shantaram Kadam
Case brief
What is this about?
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY…
What did the court decide?
Motion made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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.
NMA344-12.7
1/1
PNP
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.344 OF 2013 IN APPEAL (LODG.) NO.349 OF 2011 IN TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO.22 OF 2007 IN TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO.21 OF 2007
Sandhya Shekar Pavaskar ..Appellant. versus Sunil Shantaram Kadam ..Respondent. .....
Mr. A.V. Chatuphale for the Appellant.
CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, AND S.C.GUPTE, JJ.
12 July 2013.
P.C. :
There is a delay of six days in filing the Appeal which has been satisfactorily explained. The Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Sandhya Shekar Pavaskar
- respondent
Sunil Shantaram Kadam
Coram
D.Y. Chandrachud
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Ramila Rajnikant Kilachand, Vs Harsh Rajnikant Kilachand
Usha Wd/O.Shamlal Arya (Lund) and Ors. Vs Roshni S. Dauda and Ors. and Punjab and Maharashtra Co-Op. Bank Ltd.
The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, Vs M/S. Angerejmer Strictiras and Civil Engineering Co.
M/S. Fontasey Engineering Exports Pvt.Ltd., Vs Expeditors International (India) Pvt.Ltd.