Disposed

Firoz, Son of Victim Nurullah Mehboob @ Abul Rehman Sharif v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC1 Aug 2014CAI/18/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applications by persons claiming to be legal representatives of a deceased were disposed of. The Court directed that prior to withdrawing compensation, applicants must obtain an order from a competent court establishing them as the sole legal representatives.

What did the court decide?

Applications disposed of; liberty granted to applicants to file proceedings in a competent court to establish their status as sole legal representatives before withdrawing compensation.

Firoz, Son of Victim Nurullah Mehboob @ Abul Rehman Sharif Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors. — Bombay HC (2014) — LawSathi Research

cai-18.11, 239.03

pmw

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.18 OF 2011 IN

¶6

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.77 OF 2002

¶7

Mr. Nikhil Wagle and others … Applicants V/s. The State of Maharashtra and others … Respondents And Firoz, son of victim Nurullah Mehboob @ Abdul Rehman Sharif … Applicant

¶8

WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.239 OF 2003 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.77 OF 2002

¶9

Mr. Nikhil Wagle and others … Applicants V/s. The State of Maharashtra and others … Respondents And Firoz, son of victim Nurullah Mehboob @ Abdul Rehman Sharif … Applicant

¶10

Mr. Chaitanya Nikte i/by Mr. A.A. Hamdani, for Applicant in CA No.239 of 2003.

¶11

Mr. V.S. Gokhale, AGP, for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. Mr. Manhar S. Saini i/by M/s. DSK Legal, for Respondent No.4. Mr. Anil C. Singh, ASG a/w Mr. Parag Vyas and Mr. Ashok R. Varma, for the Respondent No.5.

¶12

CORAM : A.S. OKA & A. S. CHANDURKAR, JJ.

¶13

DATE : 1^st AUGUST, 2014

¶14

P.C.

¶15

. Under the order passed by this Court in the main PIL dated 7^th October, 2002, it was directed that the legal representatives of the

¶16

deceased Nurullah Mehboob will be entitled to a compensation of Rs.10

¶17

1 of 3

¶18

2 cai-18.11, 239.03

¶19

lakhs which has been already deposited in this Court. These two Applications are filed by the persons claiming to be the legal representatives of the said deceased. Another Application being C.A. No.2403 of 2002 was filed by the Applicant who was claiming to be the mother of the deceased. The said Application has been disposed of today as the mother has died.

¶20

Under the orders of this Court, a sum of Rs.10 lakhs will be payable to the legal representatives of the deceased. The Writ Court cannot decide the dispute as to who are the legal representatives of the deceased. There appears to be a dispute between the persons claiming to be the legal representatives of the deceased who have filed the present Applications as regards their respective shares. There is nothing on record to show that there are no other legal representatives apart from those who have made Applications in this Court.

¶21

Therefore, before we allow the persons claiming to be the legal representatives to withdraw a sum of Rs.10 lakhs with interest accrued thereon, the persons claiming to be the legal representatives will have to produce an order of the Competent Court holding that they are the only legal representatives of the deceased. We, therefore, dispose of these Applications by granting a liberty to the Applicants to

¶22

2 of 3

¶23

3 cai-18.11, 239.03

¶24

take out appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. Considering the facts of the case, if appropriate proceedings are filed by the persons claiming to be the legal representatives of the deceased, the concerned

¶25

Court shall give necessary priority for disposal of the proceedings.

¶26

(A. S. CHANDURKAR, J ) (A.S.OKA, J )

¶27

3 of 3

Firoz, Son of Victim Nurullah Mehboob @ Abul Rehman Sharif v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Firoz, Son of Victim Nurullah Mehboob @ Abul Rehman Sharif v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradip Parshuram Phalke and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra, through the Principal Secretary, Water Supply and Sanitation Dept and Ors.

Shri. Devendrasinh Sadashiv Patil Vs Rupee Co-Operative Bank Ltd. and Ors.

Mr. Dinesh Tukaram Chaudhari Vs Smt. Vaishali Dinesh Chaudhari

Mr. Nikhil Wagle and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Nikhil Wagle and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Janardan Subhana Parabker Vs Kalpana Janardan Parabker