This is a short order dismissing a writ petition filed to challenge the appointment of a Court Commissioner in a suit for recovery of possession. The court held that the order was not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 227.
Writ petition dismissed with no 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 W.P. 561.2013
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 561 OF 2013
Purbhaji Ramrao Adkine V/s Dajiba @ Dajisaheb Amrata Adkine
| Office Notes,Office | Court's or Judge's orders |
|---|---|
| Memoranda of |
|
| Coram,appearances, | ................................ |
| Court's orders or |
CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. |
| directions and |
|
| Registrar's orders | DATE : 21/01/2013. |
Mr. P.S. Agrawal, Advocate for the Petitioner.
PER COURT :
2 W.P. 561.2013
absence of these facts, the Court could not have appointed the Court Commissioner.
[ S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. ]
KNP/W.P. 561.2013
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court is entitled to exercise writ jurisdiction under Article 226 to set aside the impugned order allowing the appointment of a Court Commissioner.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Purbhaji Ramrao Adkine
Dajiba @ Dajisaheb Amrata Adkine
S. V. Gangapurwala
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
