The petitioners were absent. The court held that had the petitioners been present, the real brother's pending Green Tribunal application might be relevant, but due to non-appearance, the petition was dismissed for want of prosecution.
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.
24-pilst-5990-2014.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELALTE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (L) NO.5990 OF 2014
Parshuram Balaram Patil and Anr. ...Petitioners vs. City and Industrial Development Corporation (Maharashtra) Limited and Ors. ...Respondents
None for the Petitioners
Mr. B.B. Sharma, for Respondent No. 1. Ms. Rekha Panchal, for Respondent No. 4 Ms. Reena Salunkhe, AGP for Respondent No. 3.
CORAM : SHANTANU S. KEMKAR & SARANG V. KOTWAL, JJ.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 03, 2018
P.C.:
. None for the Petitioners.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
(SHANTANU S. KEMKAR, J.)
1/1
Vishal Parekar
Parshuram Balaram Patil
City and Industrial Development Corporation (Maharashtra) Limited
Shantanu S. Kemkar
Sarang V. Kotwal
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
