In a civil application, the court examined the averments in the application and an order of this Court. Ruling in favor of the applicant, the application was allowed pursuant to the prayer clause.
The Application was allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).
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.
CAW2686-4.12
1/1
PNP
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2686 OF 2014
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.5872 OF 2007
Suresh Ganpati Dhonukshe versus
State of Maharashtra and others
...Applicant.
..Respondents.
Mr. Rahul Prakash Walvekar for the Applicant. Mr. V.S. Gokhale, AGP for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. M.S. Lagu for the Respondent No.3.
CORAM : A.S. OKA &
P.C. :
Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. In view of averments made in the Application and order of this Court at Exhibit 2, the Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).
Place the Writ Petition High on Board on the daily Board on 16th December, 2014.
Suresh Ganpati Dhonukshe
State of Maharashtra
A.S. Oka
P.C.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
