The High Court dismissed the writ petition, rejecting the application to delete the petitioner as a defendant, and dismissed the petition with no costs.
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
W.P.No.5693/13
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.5693 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.P.Tiwari, advocate holding for Mr.B.M.Vishnu,
advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr.M.R.Bhokarikar, advocate for the Respondent Nos.1
and 2.
CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.
Date : 27.01.2014.
PER COURT :
which is part of the suit property. In case it is found that the
2
W.P.No.5693/13
present petitioner was unnecessarily arrayed as defendant, plaintiff can claim compensatory cost. The Court while rejecting the application has considered the pleadings of the parties and has rejected the application. Considering the above, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.
(S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.)
Dt.27.01.2014. asp/office/wp5693.13
3
W.P.No.5693/13
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be deleted as a defendant in the suit.
Mr. B.M. Vishnu
Respondent Nos. 1 and 2
S.V.GANGAPURWALA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court