The writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution as the petitioner and his advocate were absent despite names being displayed on the daily board.
Writ Petition dismissed for want of prosecution.
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.
16-WP.1747.2013.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1747 OF 2013
Sharad N. Mahimkar } Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra } and Ors. } Respondents
Mr. Vinay M. Bhate for the Petitioner. None for the Respondents.
CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & M. S. SONAK, JJ.
DATED :- FEBRUARY 12, 2016
P.C. :-
The Petitioner and the Advocate are absent. Their
names are duly displayed on the daily Board. The Writ Petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.
(M.S.SONAK, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
Page 1 of 1
J.V.Salunke,PA
Sharad N. Mahimkar
The State of Maharashtra
S. C. Dharmadhikari
M. S. Sonak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
