In Appeal (L) No.49 of 2014, the High Court of Bombay disposed of the appeal as withdrawn by the appellants. The court held that the pending Notice of Motion did not survive the withdrawal.
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
appl-49-14
upk
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
O.O.C.J.
APPEAL (L) NO.49 OF 2014 ALONGWITH NOTICE OF MOTION (L) NO.317 OF 2014 IN NOTICE OF MOTION (L) NO.61 OF 2013 IN SUIT NO.349 OF 2013
Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court’s Court’s or orders or directions & Judge’s orders. Registrar’s orders.
Mr.Arun Kumar Tripathi i/b Law Juris for the Appellants.
CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.A.SAYED, JJ DATED : 2 AUGUST 2016
P.C.:
(Not on Board. Taken on Board)
. Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants
has placed on record the order dated 16 July 2016 passed by the learned single Judge in Summary Suit No.2240 of 2009. In view of clause (3) of the said order, he seeks permission to withdraw this Appeal.
2
appl-49-14
upk
survive and the same is disposed of.
(A.A. SAYED, J) (A.S.OKA, J)
A.S. OKA
A.A. SAYED
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court