This court disposed of a Notice of Motion seeking modification of an order dated 1 April 2015. The court held that no case for modification was made out as the prior order was based on the applicant's own recorded statement.
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
nmw-118-16
upk
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.118 OF 2016 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2493 OF 2013
Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions & Registrar’s orders.
Court’s or Judge’s orders.
Mr.Akhilesh Singh for the Applicant.
CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.A.SAYED, JJ DATED : 21 SEPTEMBER 2016
P.C.:
. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant, who is writ petitioner, in support of the prayer for modification of the order dated 1 April 2015. Perused the order dated 1 April 2015. The said order has been passed on the basis of the statement of the Applicant himself, which is recorded in paragraph 1 of the said order. Hence, no case for modification is made out. Notice of Motion is disposed of.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order dated 1 April 2015 requires modification based on the applicant's statement recorded therein.
Applicant
Respondent
A.S. OKA
A.A. SAYED
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court