The court dismissed Public Interest Litigation No. 102 of 2013 initiated by Indian Council of Investors against Union of India for want of prosecution as the petitioner did not appear on the final hearing date.
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.
7-pil.102.2013
1/2
nsc.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.102 OF 2013
Indian Council of Investors ...Petitioner Versus Union of India and Ors. ...Respondents
None for the Petitioner.
Mr.D.P.Singh, for the Respondent – Union of India.
Mr.Chirag Kamdar a/w Mr.Asadulla Thangal i/b M/s.Naik Naik & Co., for the Respondent No.4.
Ms.Namrata Shah i/b M/s.K.Ashar & Co., for the Respondent No.5.
Ms.Namita Shetty i/b Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, for the Respondent No.8.
CORAM : V. M. KANADE & REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ.
DATE : 12th FEBRUARY, 2016
P.C. :
when the matter was called out, neither the petitioner nor his counsel
remained present.
7-pil.102.2013
2/2
submits that due to subsequent events the petition has become infructuous. The learned counsel further submits that most of the reliefs which are claimed by the petitioner in this petition have already been granted by this Court either in this PIL or some other proceedings which are pending in
this Court.
petition.
REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.
V.M. KANADE, J.
Indian Council of Investors
Union of India
Respondent No. 4
Respondent No. 5
Respondent No. 8
V. M. Kanade
Revati Mohite Dere
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
