The High Court at Bombay in a chamber judgment disposed of a civil application and review petition regarding a stamp duty dispute involving the petitioner, who appeared as applicant.
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.
skc
CAOST-10828-18.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION (STAMP) NO. 10828 OF 2018 IN REVIEW PETITION (STAMP) NO. 32243 OF 2017 IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 376 OF 2017 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 234 OF 2017
Suhas Balkrishna Samant .. Applicant/Petitioner vs. Ganpat Sakharam Shete & Ors. .. Respondents
Ms Rushita Jain for Applicant / Petitioner. Mr. Suhas Balkrishna Samant – Applicant / Petitioner present in person. None for Respondents.
CORAM : M. S. SONAK, J. DATE: 16 APRIL 2018
P.C : (In Chamber )
1] Ms Jain, the learned counsel for the applicant / petitioner states that attempts have been made to serve the respondents, however, the respondents have refused service. She states that necessary affidavit of service to this effect will be filed by tomorrow. 2] On the basis of the aforesaid, the delay in institution of the review petition is condoned and the civil application is disposed of
(M. S. SONAK, J.)
Chandka
1/1
Suhas Balkrishna Samant
Ganpat Sakharam Shete & Ors.
M. S. SONAK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
