Granting review in a writ petition that was dismissed on the erroneous premise that the TILR was cross-examined when it was not. The impugned order was recalled and the writ petition was restored.
The order dated 20.1.2014 in W.P.No.6711/2013 is reviewed, recalled, and the Writ Petition is restored.
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
Rev.Appln.No.10/14
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
REVIEW APPLICATION NO.10 OF 2014 IN
W.P.NO.6711 OF 2013
Office Notes, Office
Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court's
orders or directions
andRegistrar's
orders.
Court's or Judge's orders
Mr.S.L.Bhapkar, advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr.A.K.Gawali, advocate for the Respondent.
CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.
Date : 30.01.2014.
PER COURT :
20.1.2014, passed in W.P.No.6711/2013.
was not examined or cross-examined. However, he was guided by the reference to the examination and cross-examination of the Court Commissioner in another order.
2
Rev.Appln.No.10/14
that the plaintiff has already cross-examined the TILR. Considering the fact that the same was on erroneous premise, it would be necessary to hear the Writ Petition afresh.
(S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.)
Dt.30.01.2014. asp/office/Rev10.14
3
Rev.Appln.No.10/14
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the review application should be allowed given that the impugned order was passed on an erroneous premise regarding the examination of the TILR?
Petitioner
Respondent
S.V.GANGAPURWALA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court