A writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution after the petitioner's advocate refused to argue, citing an intention to replace counsel without formally discharging or instructing the new advocate.
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.
WP.180.2014.8.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 180 OF 2014
Pooja Co-operative Housing } Society (proposed) } Petitioner versus Vice-President and Chief } Executive Officer and Ors. } Respondents
Mr. Mehul Thakkar for the Petitioner.
Mr. P. G. Lad for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3.
Ms. Madhubala Kajale - AGP for Respondent No. 4 State.
CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & B. P. COLABAWALLA, JJ. DATED :- DECEMBER 16, 2015
P.C. :-
When this Petition was called out, the Petitioner's Advocate refused to address us on the ground that the Petitioner intends to take away the papers from him and engage another Advocate.
Page 1 of 2
J.V.Salunke,PA
WP.180.2014.8.doc
papers by obtaining discharge in terms of the rules applicable to such eventualities. Neither the Petitioner has engaged any Advocate other than the one who has filed the Petition nor the Advocate who has filed the Petition has obtained discharge. The Court cannot tolerate such negligence and show indulgence to litigants like the Petitioner. The Petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.
(B.P.COLABAWALLA, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
Page 2 of 2
J.V.Salunke,PA
Pooja Co-operative Housing Society (proposed)
Vice-President and Chief Executive Officer and Ors.
SC DharMadhikari
BP Colabawalla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
