Allowed

Sukhdeosingh S/O Preetamsingh Panesar v. State of Maharashtra Thr.Its Secy and 3 Ors.

Bombay HC18 Dec 2015LPA/140/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The bench allowed two civil applications: CAZ 73/2015 for condoning delay in filing an application to bring legal heirs on record, and CAZ 74/2015 permitting legal heirs to be brought on record. Consequently, the Letters Patent Appeal 140/07, challenging the dismissal of a writ petition regarding a restaurant license, was disposed of without adjudication due to a post-decision purchase and renewal

What did the court decide?

Applications for bringing legal heirs on record and condoning delay allowed. Letters Patent Appeal disposed of without adjudication.

Sukhdeosingh S/O Preetamsingh Panesar Vs State of… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

1/2

¶2

1812lpa140.07.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

CIVIL APPLICATIONS (CAZ) NO. 73 AND 74 OF 2015 IN/AND LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 140 OF 2007 IN

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 836 OF 1997 (D)

¶6

(Sukhadeosingh Preetamsingh Panesar Vs. State of Maharashtra & others)

¶7

- - - - -- - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶8

¶9

Shri Maheshwari, Adv. With Shri Anand Parchure, Advocate for the appellant. Smt. S. S. Jachak, A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

¶10

CORAM : B. R. GAVAI AND P. N. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATED : 18 DECEMBER, 2015

¶11

CAZ NO.73/2015 :

¶12

For the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed. Delay in filing the application for bringing legal heirs on record is condoned. CAZ NO.74/2015 :

¶13

This is an application for bringing legal heirs of the appellant on record.

¶14

For the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed and the legal heirs of the appellant are permitted to be brought on record. L.P.A. NO. 140/07 :

¶15

The appeal is taken up for hearing.

¶16

2/2

¶17

1812lpa140.07.odt

¶18

The appellant has approached this Court being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by learned Single Judge, thereby dismissing the writ petition filed by the present appellant, which was in turn filed challenging the order passed by the Commissioner of Police, Nagpur rejecting renewal of eating house licence.

¶19

It appears that the eating house licence was not renewed on the ground that the lease of the premises had expired. The appellants have now filed a pursis dated 07/12/2015 stating therein that they have purchased the premises from respondent No.5 and thereafter the eating house licence has been regularly renewed. In that view of the matter, nothing survives for adjudication. L.P.A. disposed of as such.

¶20

JUDGE JUDGE

¶21

wwl

Sukhdeosingh S/O Preetamsingh Panesar v. State of Maharashtra Thr.Its Secy and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukhdeosingh S/O Preetamsingh Panesar v. State of Maharashtra Thr.Its Secy and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Living With Dignity Dying With Resepct, Nagpur Thr. Its Representative Ravindra Bhusari, Trustee, Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. the Chief Secretary

M/S Jaika Vanijya Limited, through Ita Authorized Signatory and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Department of Urban Development, Mumbai and Others

Mohan Apparao Jadhao Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of Public Health, Mumbai and 2 Others

Sukhdeosingh S/O Preetamsingh Panesar Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Mumbai and Others

Sukhdeosingh S/O Preetamsingh Panesar Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Mumbai and Others

United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Amravati Divisional Office through the Regional Manager Vs Smt. Kumud Suryabhan Pohekar and Others