Allowed

Mrs. Surekha Namdeo Dhapte v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC19 Jul 2018CAW/1268/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a civil application to restore a dismissed writ petition against a specific respondent. The court accepted the applicant's undertaking to serve the respondent via RPAD or hand delivery and extended compliance time to 31 August 2018.

What did the court decide?

Restoration of Writ Petition No. 10500 of 2017 against Respondent No. 6 and extension of time to comply until 31 August 2018.

Mrs. Surekha Namdeo Dhapte Vs State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

15.caw.1268.18.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1268 OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 10500 OF 2017

¶4

Mrs Surekha N. Dhapte

¶5

..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

State of Maharashtra and Others

¶8

..Respondents

¶9

Mr.Balwant Salunkhe I/b S. D. Pandey, for the Applicant. Mrs. Pushpalata N. Diwan, AGP, for Respondent Nos. 1 to 5.

¶10

CORAM:- K. K. TATED & B. P. COLABAWALLA,JJ. DATE :- JULY 19, 2018.

¶11

P. C.:

¶12

Heard. By this Civil Application the Applicant is seeking to restore Writ Petition No.10500 of 2017 against Respondent No.6 which stood dismissed in view of the conditional order dated 25th January, 2018.

¶13

2 The learned counsel for the Applicant submits that it remained on his part to take appropriate steps for service on Respondent No.6. He submits that they already forwarded papers of the present Writ Petition to Respondent No.6 by RPAD on 16th July, 2018 but till today they have not received any acknowledgment. He submits that the Applicant undertakes to serve Respondent No.6 either by hand delivery

¶14

Aswale 1/2

¶15

Digitally signed by AnjaliTushar Anjali TusharAswaleDate: Aswale 2018.07.2413:29:54 +0530

¶16

or by RPAD within four weeks from today. The statement is accepted.

¶17

3 Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Applicant, the averments made in the Civil Application, and as the Applicant is ready and willing to serve Respondent No.6 afresh, we are satisfied that the Applicant has made out a case for allowing the Civil Application.

¶18

4 Hence, the following order:-

¶19

a) Writ Petition No.10500 of 2017 is restored on file against Respondent No.6.

¶20

b) Time to comply the order dated 25th January, 2018 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.10500 of 2017 is extended till 31st August, 2018.

¶21

c) The Applicant to serve Respondent No.6 along with entire proceedings by way of private notice either by RPAD and/or by hand delivery and to file an Affidavit of service to that effect on or 31st August, 2018 failing which the Civil Application stand dismissed without further reference to Court.

¶22

d) Civil Application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶23

( B. P. COLABAWALLA, J. ) ( K. K. TATED, J. )

¶24

Aswale 2/2

Mrs. Surekha Namdeo Dhapte v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. Surekha Namdeo Dhapte v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kalu Bhagu Margale (Since Deceased) Thru. Lrs. Vs the Divisional Commissioner Pune Division and Prs

Mr.Manish Mohan Jethva Vs Mrs.Mittal Manish Jethva

Smt. Chitra Swapnil Amte Vs Mr. Swapnil Ananta Amte

Smt.Priya Atul Gonel Vs Mr. Atul Arun Gonel

Mr. Manoj Mahadev Vishwakarma Vs Mrs. Sushma Manoj Vishwakarma

Ramchandra Baburao Bhoir and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.