Single judge permitted impleadment of a petitioner as respondent No.8 due to existings popularity but not as petitioner no.2 allowed amendment time issued and disposed of civil application.
Applicant permitted to be impleaded as respondent No.8; ordered to amend petition within two weeks.
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.
P8. CAW 580-16.doc
Chittewan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.580 OF 2016 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1236 OF 2010
| Ramchandra Hari Kank And |
.. Intervenor/Applicant |
|---|---|
| Yashwant Jagannath Malusare and Anr | .. Respondents/ Original Petitioners |
| V e r s u s | |
| The State of Maharashtra and Others | .. Respondents |
Mr. L. Deshmukh i/b Ajay Joshi for the Applicant. Mr. S.A. Raje Pandhare for Intervenor. Mr. A.R. Metkari, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4.
CORAM : M.S. SONAK, J. DATE : 2 MARCH, 2016.
P.C. :
2 The Applicant cannot be impleaded as Petitioner No.2 in the present petition. This is because, two petitioners cannot be represented by two separate Advocates. However, if the Applicant, seeks the impleadment as Respondent, the same can be granted, considering that the Applicant is elder brother of erstwhile Petitioner No.2.
1/2
P8. CAW 580-16.doc
Chittewan
Respondent No.8 in this petition.
5 Civil Application No.580 of 2016 is disposed of.
2/2
Ramchandra Hari Kank
Yashwant Jagannath Malusare and Anr
The State of Maharashtra and Others
M.S. Sonak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
