In this writ petition concerning unpaid rent from 2005, the High Court noted that the respondent authority was processing a repayment proposal. No further order was passed as steps were underway.
No further order passed; directed the respondent authority to process the existing repayment proposal at the earliest.
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 WP-9220.15
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 9220 OF 2015
Chhaya Motichand Bundelkhandi
...PETITIONER
versus
The State of Maharashtra and others ...RESPONDENTS
Mr. G.L. Gujar, Advocate for petitioner Mr. N.B. Patil, AGP for respondents No.1 and 2 Mr. V.R. Dhorde, Advocate for respondent No. 3
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND
K.K. SONAWANE, JJ.
DATED : 21st JULY, 2016.
Order :-
2 WP-9220.15
made available. Said proposal is sent to the State for approval and sanction.
Sd/-
Sd/-
MTK
1 issue framed by the court
Whether rent due from 2005 by the Municipal Council for leased property needs to be addressed.
Chhaya Motichand Bundelkhandi
The State of Maharashtra
others
S. V. GANGAPURWALA
K. K. SONAWANE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
