The High Court of Bombay disposed of a review petition as not pressed because the Petitioners did not require further hearing following previous court directions and order passage. The petition was formally closed without engaging substantive legal arguments.
Review petition disposed of as not pressed.
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.
RPW. 9-14
VPH
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
REVIEW PETITION No. 9 OF 2014 IN WRIT PETITION No. 838 OF 2013
Mrs. Vimal Janak Ganjawala & Ors. ... Petitioners Vs.
Mr. Vikhil Dhoka i/b Solicis Lex, for the Petitioners. None for the Respondents.
CORAM : V. M. KANADE, & M. S. SONAK, JJ. DATE : JULY 23, 2015 (at 2.35 p.m. in Chamber) PC.
. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Review Petitioners submits that since pursuant to the directions given by this Court, parties have been heard and the order has been passed by the competent authority, Petitioners do not press the review petition. Review petition is accordingly disposed of as “not pressed”.
Vinayak Halemath
1 / 1
Mrs. Vimal Janak Ganjawala & Ors.
Mr. Vikhil Dhoka
None
V. M. Kanade
M. S. Sonak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
