The applicant sought to withdraw a notice of motion due to a change in legal advice and submitted that they no longer pressed the notice. The court dismissed the notice of motion as withdrawn without any order as to costs.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.
kvm
1/2
77-NMSL1741.13
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION (L) NO. 1741 OF 2013 IN SUIT NO. 2546 OF 2012
Lina Y.Maneklal
..... Applicant Org.Defendant No.1.
Ashutosh Y.Maneklal
..... Plaintiff
VERSUS
Lina Y.Maneklal & Ors.
..... Defendants
Mr. S.U.Kamdar, Senior Advocate, a/w. Mr.M.Singaporia, i/b. Hariani & CO. for the Plaintiff.
Mr.Sanjay Jain, a/w. Ms.Leena Advani, i/b. Law Charter for the Applicant in Notice of Motion and Defendant No.1.
Mr.Mayur Khandeparkar, a/w. Mr.S.B.Pawar, i/b. S.K.Legal Associates for Defendant No.1.
Ms.S.Shaikh, i/b. S.K.Srivastav for Interveners and Applicants in Chamber Summons.
No records and proceedings.
CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA, J.
DATED : 19th SEPTEMBER, 2013
P.C.
Mr.Jain, learned counsel appearing for the applicant on instruction states that applicant has been now advised that order dated 16th October 2012 passed by this court does not prevent applicant from letting out her premises. In view of this
kvm
2/2
77-NMSL1741.13
advise received by the applicant, applicant does not press this Notice of Motion.
Lina Y. Maneklal
Lina Y. Maneklal & Ors.
R.D. DHANUKA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
