This single-judge Bench rejected the review petition filed by Bhakti Buildwell seeking restoration of a writ petition order dated 21/08/2017, holding that the review was not sustainable.
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.
RPWL/49/2017
BDPSPS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTON REVIEW PETITION (L) NO.49 OF 2017 IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 1740 OF 2016
Bhakti Buildwell
… Review Petitioner.
V/s
Red Rose Co-operative Housing Society Ltd and Others …. Respondents.
Mr. G.S. Godbole a/w Mr. Husain Ashif for Review Petitioner. Mr. Mihir Desai, Senior Counsel a/w Mr. Ankur Shah and Mr. Vinamra Kopariha for the original Petitioners. Mr. Sagar Patil for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
CORAM: B. R. GAVAI & M.S. KARNIK, JJ. DATE: 6th October, 2017 (In Chamber at 2.50 P.M.)
P.C.:-
1] The Review Petitioner has sought review of the order passed by this Court dated 21/08/2017 in Writ Petition No. 1740 of 2016.
2] It is the contention of the Review Petitioner that the order under review substantially affects rights of the Review Petitioner. It is submitted that though parties to the Petition were aware about the rights of the Review Petitioner, nobody pointed out the same to the
1/2
RPWL/49/2017
Court and, as such, the Order dated 21/08/2017 needs to be reviewed and the Petition restored to the file.
3] Perusal of the Order passed by us would reveal that the Court has specifically observed that the Court is not considering the private dispute between Respondent No.3 on the one hand and Petitioners and Respondent No.4 on the other hand. The relief granted in the Petition is basically commanding the Respondent – Corporation to discharge its statutory duties.
4] If it is the contention of the Review Petitioner that the Order has been obtained by the original Petitioners by suppressing material facts, then the remedy of the Review Petitioner to file a separate Petition is not taken away. Reliance in this respect can be placed on the Judgment of the Apex Court in Pohla Singh alias Pohla Ram (D) by LRs. and Others vs. State of Punjab and Others1 .
5] Review Petition, therefore, stands rejected.
(M. S. KARNIK, J. ) (B. R. GAVAI, J. )
1 (2004) 6 SCC 126
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a review petition challenging the order in a writ petition regarding discharge of statutory duties by a corporation is maintainable.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Pohla Singh alias Pohla Ram (D) by LRs. and Others vs. State of Punjab and OthersReferred¶18
Pohla Singh alias Pohla Ram (D) by LRs. and Others vs. State of Punjab and Others (2004) 6 SCC 126 · Who else cites this
Bhakti Buildwell
Red Rose Co-operative Housing Society Ltd
B. R. Gavai
M. S. Karnik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
