Dismissed

Shaikh Mohd Shabbir v. the State of Maharashtra and 14 Other

Bombay HC4 Jan 2016WP/2580/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking appointment of a Court Commissioner, directing disposal of pending interim applications in the trial court. It held linguistic remedial action unnecessary as the petitioners sought substantive reliefs pending in LCSuit 550 of 2014.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of. Trial Court directed to dispose of pending Notices of Motion expeditiously.

Shaikh Mohd Shabbir Vs the State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2016)

oswp2580

ssp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2580 OF 2015

¶5

Shaikh Mohd. Shabbir ...Petitioner
vs.

¶6

State of Maharashtra & Ors.

¶7

...Respondents

¶8

Mr.Shaikh M. Shabbir the Petitioner in person
Mr.R.S.Mane, AGP for the respondent Nos.1,12,13,14
and 15.

¶9

Mr.S.S.Redkar for respondent No.6
Mr.Rakesh Singh i/b M.V.Kini & Co. for respondent
No.10

¶10

CORAM : A.S.OKA, &
 C.V.BHADANG,JJ.
 DATE : JANUARY 4, 2016

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

1Heard the petitioner appearing in person. It
is not in dispute that the L.C.Suit No.550 of 2014
filed by the petitioner is pending in the City Civil
Court at Mumbai. The substantive reliefs claimed in
this petition in terms of prayer clauses (a) to(c)
will have to be sought in the pending suit.

¶13

2The petitioner appearing in person states that
the Notice of Motion Nos.787 and 789 of 2014 have
been taken out by him being for appointment of the
Court Commissioner but the Trial Court has not
passed any order on the said Notice of Motion.

¶14

3As pointed out earlier, the reliefs which are
sought in this petition will have to be sought by

¶15

2 oswp2580

¶16

the petitioner before the Trial Court. If the
grievance of the petitioner is that the Trial Court
is not passing any order on the pending Notices of
Motion/applications taken out by him in the pending
suit, it will be open for the petitioner to move the
Trial Court for expeditious hearing of the pending
Notices of Motion and the applications.

¶17

4If the Notices of Motion No.787 and 789 of 2014
are pending before the Trial Court, the same shall
be disposed of by the Trial Court as expeditiously
as possible.

¶18

5In the event, the applications made by the
petitioner or the Notices of Motion filed by the
petitioner are rejected by the Trial Court,
appropriate remedies are always open for the
petitioner to challenge the order passed by the
Trial Court.

¶19

6Subject to what is observed above, writ
petition is disposed of.

Shaikh Mohd Shabbir v. the State of Maharashtra and 14 Other

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaikh Mohd Shabbir v. the State of Maharashtra and 14 Other

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. Kamod Shankar Patil and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mr. Jeevanrao Vishwanathrao Gore Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shri. Kisan Shankar Sakpal and Ors. Vs the Panchayat Samiti, Mahad, through Block Development Officer and Ors.

Vishnu Babaji Rane Vs Municipal Commissioner and Anr.

Babu Kalappa Jagtap Vs the State of Maharashtra and 4 Others

Ayurved Shikshan Mandals Dharmarth Ashtang Ayurved Rugnalaya, through Secretary, Dr. M. H. Paranjap Vs the Divisional Health Officer,, Divisional Office NO.3 (Health), Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr.