The High Court dismissed a writ petition for non-prosecution as the petitioner's counsel was absent on the hearing date, following a similar absence on a prior 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.
1
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.2884 OF 2015
Shivaji S/o Raghunath Motibone Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others.
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.
Court's or Judge's orders
Mr.S.P.Kausalye, advocate for the petitioner absent. Mr.M.B.Bharaswadkar, A.G.P. for the State.
CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA AND
K.L.WADANE,JJ. Date : 06.10.2016.
PER COURT :
"None appears for the petitioner. Since two dates, the matter is required to be adjourned at the instance of the petitioner. In case the matter is not worked on the next date, the Court shall be constrained to dismiss the petition."
2
prosecution.
(K.L.WADANE,J.) (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.)
Dt.06.10.2016. asp/office/wp2884.15
Shivaji S/o Raghunath Motibone
The State of Maharashtra
S.V.Gangapurwala
K.L.Wadane
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
