Akhtarunnisa Begum Abdul Rashid and Others v. Rizwana Begum Sharif Pathan and Others
Case brief
What is this about?
(1) Review Appln. No. 00258 of 2017 IN THE…
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.
(Order) (1) Review Appln. No. 00258 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.
Review Application No. 00258 of 2017 (In Writ Petition No. 11504 of 2017)
District : Beed
Akhtarunnisa Begum w/o. Abdul
Rashid,
Age : 71 years,
Occupation : Household,
R/o. Bhaldarpura, Beed,
Taluka & District Beed,
& 07 others. .. Applicants.
versus
Rizwana Begum w/o. Sharif Pathan,
Age : 46 years,
Occupation : Household,.. Non-applicants.
R/o. Chun Galli, Beed, (Nos.01 to 06 -
District Beed, Original writ
& 07 others. petitioners)
...........
Mr. S.S. Kazi, Advocate, holding for Ms. Fatema S. Kazi, Advocate, for applicants.
Mr. K.J. Suryawanshi, Advocate, for non-applicant nos.01 to 06.
Mr. S.B. Deshpande, Asst. Solicitor General of India, for non-applicant no.07.
Mr. S.P. Sonpawale, Asst. Government Pleader, for non-applicant no.08.
...........
CORAM : R.M. BORDE &
SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, JJ.
DATE : 15TH NOVEMBER 2017
(Order) (2) Review Appln. No. 00258 of 2017
ORAL ORDER :
01.There is no reason to cause interference in
the order passed while disposing of Writ Petition No.
11504 of 2017. The review application is based on
mere apprehension and, as such, does not deserve to
be considered.
02.The review application, as such, stands
rejected.
( Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi ) ( R.M. Borde )
JUDGE JUDGE
...........
puranik / RA258.17
Akhtarunnisa Begum
Rizwana Begum
R.M. Borde
Vibha Kankanwadi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court