Allowed

Mohammed Ismail Dawood Sahib Mulla v. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and Anr.

Bombay HC8 Mar 2016WP/2969/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged an order of the trial court under Article 227 rejecting a request for reopening evidence. After hearing counsel who sought to withdraw the petition with liberty to file an application in the trial court, the High Court allowed the withdrawal.

What did the court decide?

The petition was allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to file an application for exhibiting the power of attorney in the trial court.

Mohammed Ismail Dawood Sahib Mulla Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

905.WP.2969-16.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition NO. 2969 OF 2016

¶4

MOHAMMED ISMAIL DAWOOD SAHIB MULLA

¶5

...Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD AND ANR

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

Mr. Rajkumar Mishra a/w. Jyoti Devalekar-Joshte & Bhavana S. Kamble, for the Petitioner. Mr. A.R. Metkari, AGP, for Respondent No.2.

¶10

CORAM : R. G. KETKAR, J.

¶11

DATE : 08^th MARCH, 2016

¶12

P.C.

¶13

Heard Mr. Mishra, learned Counsel for the petitioner, at length.

¶14

By this Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, hereinafter referred to as 'plaintiff', has challenged the judgment and order dated 15.1.2016 passed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Khalapur below Exhibit-1 in Regular Civil Suit No.25 of 2015. By that order, learned trial Judge rejected the application made by the plaintiff for setting

¶15

aside order closing the plaintiff's evidence and allowing re-

1 / 2

905.WP.2969-16.doc

examination of the plaintiff under Order XVIII Rule 17 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

¶20

Mr. Mishra submitted that the plaintiff has filed affidavit of evidence and was cross-examined by the defendant's Advocate. During the course of cross-examination, the plaintiff's witness deposed that the suit is instituted by him as a power of attorney holder of Mohammad Ismail Dawood Sahib Mulla. It is further deposed that he had given instruction to Advocate to draft the suit as a power of attorney holder of said Mohammad Ismail Dawood Sahib Mulla. The witness has produced true copy of the power of attorney through Notary Public.

¶21

The only grievance of Mr. Mishra is that learned trial Judge did not mark Exhibit to this power of attorney. He, therefore, seeks permission to withdraw this Petition with liberty to file application for exhibiting that power of attorney in the trial Court. In view thereof, on the motion made by Mr. Mishra, the petition is allowed to be withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. Order accordingly.

¶22

Deshmane (PS)

¶23

2 / 2

Mohammed Ismail Dawood Sahib Mulla v. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Ismail Dawood Sahib Mulla v. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Mariegold Infratech Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs Mr. Mukund Subhash Karwa and Ors.

Shri Vilas Ramchadnra Shinde Vs Smt. Sashi v. Sachdev

Sion Kamgar Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs Dr. Atul Pundalik Chirmade and Ors.

Bombay Construction and Engineering Co.Pvt. Ltd. Vs Motilal Atmaram Tandel and Ors.

Archana Yogesh Khollam Vs Chandrabhaga Balu Bhondave and Ors.

Shri. Krushna Ramchandra Kankarej and Ors. Vs Shri. Krushna Vitthal Kankarej and Ors.