The High Court disposed of Writ Petition No. 6205 of 2015. The court held that since plots mentioned in a communication were being substituted for old plots, the petitioners' grievance did not survive and no order was passed as to costs.
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
0308wp6205.15
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR .
WRIT PETITION NO. 6205 OF 2015
(Sau. Arti w/o Vijay Goenka & Ors. vs. M.I.D.C. thr. Area Manager & Ors.)
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,_____________________________________________________________________________ appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders.
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ. AUGUST 03, 2016.
Heard Shri S.C. Mehadia, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri M. Agnihotri, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 3, 4 & 5 and Shri I.J. Damle, learned AGP for respondent No. 2.
Perused the communication dated 15.07.2016 sent by Respondent No. 1 to the petitioners.
As the plots mentioned therein are being substituted for old plots, we find that the grievance of the petitioners does not survive.
Hence, keeping all rival contentions open, we dispose of the present writ petition. No order as to costs.
JUDGE
JUDGE
*GS.
2
0308wp6205.15
C E R T I F I C A T E
“I certify that this Order uploaded is a true and correct copy of original signed Order.”
Uploaded by : G. Shamdasani Uploaded on : 03.08.2016.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the grievance of the petitioners survives given the substitution of old plots for new ones.
Sau. Arti w/o Vijay Goenka & Ors.
M.I.D.C.
B.P. DHARMADHIKARI
KUM. INDIRA JAIN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
