Suhas Kashinath Gurav v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
The Full Bench observed that the entire cause of action arose in Bombay. Consequently, the petition for PIL No.34 of 2010 was transferred to the Original Side of the High Court, directing the petitioner to make consequential amendments.
What did the court decide?
Transfer of PIL No.34 of 2010 from Civil Appellate Jurisdiction to the Original Side; direction to make consequential amendments.
What the court decided
pil34
1
ssp
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.34 OF 2010
Office Notes, Office
Memorandam of Coram,
appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders
or directions and
Registrar’s orders
None for the Petitioner
Mr.V.P.Malvankar, AGP `A' Panel for Respondent No.1.
Ms Mandakini Singh i/b Chitra Phadake for respondent
No.2
Ms Aparna Murlidharan i/b Mr.P.G.Lad for respondent
No.4
CORAM : A.S.OKA, &
A.A.SAYED,JJ.
DATE : APRIL 9, 2014.
P.C.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a PIL filed under Civil Appellate Jurisdiction can be disposed of summarily or requires transfer to the Original Side.
Whether the cause of action having arisen entirely in Bombay requires filing on the Original Side of the Court.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Petitioner
- respondent
Office of the SSP
- respondent
Respondents 2, 4
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court