The High Court of Bombay allowed the applicant's civil application to restore Writ Petition No.1883 of 2010, which was previously dismissed for the applicant's counsel's non-appearance, finding sufficient cause for the absence.
Civil application allowed; Writ Petition No.1883 of 2010 restored to its original file.
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.2828.2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2828 OF 2012 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1883 OF 2010
Sunil Dayaram Birari Applicant versus
Smt.Alka Pandurang Golait and others
Respondents
Mr.P.N.Joshi for Applicant. Mr.V.Mali, AGP, for State.
CORAM : SHANTANU S. KEMKAR AND PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ. DATE : 23rd November 2016
PC :
Hard learned counsel for Applicant and learned AGP on civil application seeking restoration of Writ Petition No.1883 of 2010, which suffered dismissal on 4th October 2010 for non appearance of the counsel for Applicant/Petitioner when the matter was called out. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for parties and having going through the averments made in the civil application, we are satisfied that sufficient cause is made out for non appearance of the counsel for Applicant. Accordingly, civil application is allowed. Writ Petition is restored to its original file.
(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) (SHANTANU S. KEMKAR, J.)
MST
1 issue framed by the court
Whether sufficient cause is made out for restoration of a writ petition dismissed due to non-appearance of counsel.
Sunil Dayaram Birari
Smt. Alka Pandurang Golait and others
Shantanu S. Kemkar
Prakash D. Naik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
