Single judge allowed the civil application for restoration of a writ petition as a case for restoration was made out based on averments in paragraphs 2 and 3.
Application allowed in terms of prayer clause (a); petition restored for admission.
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
caw672
ssp
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.672 OF 2014 IN
WRIT PETITION NO.8209 OF 2012
Office Notes, Office
Memorandam of Coram,
appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders
or directions and
Registrar’s orders
Ms Rutika Patil i/b Mr.Shivajirao Masal for the
Applicant
None for the Respondents.
CORAM : A.S.OKA, &
A.A.SAYED,JJ.
DATE : MARCH 14, 2014.
P.C.
1Heard the learned counsel for the
applicant. In view of the averments
made in the application and in
particular paragraphs 2 and 3 thereof,
a case for restoration is made out.
Application is allowed in terms of
prayer clause (a). Restored petition
shall be placed for admission on the
date fixed as per the CMIS.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a case for restoration is made out in view of averments in the application.
Applicant
Respondents
A.S. OKA
A.A. SAYED
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court