High Court Special Bench dismissed a Writ Petition challenging an order of the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court that directed the petitioner to conclude arguments by September 2018. The Court held no case was made out for interference as the substantive issues were pending.
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.
WPST21104_18.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO.21104 OF 2018
Virji G. Jobanputra … Petitioner Vs. Bhaskar Namdev Khandke (decd) through LRs Premlata B. Khandke and others … Respondents
Mr. Chandrakant N. Chavan for Petitioner.
CORAM : R. G. KETKAR, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 4, 2018
P.C. :
Not on Board. At the request of Mr. Chavan, learned Counsel for the petitioner, taken up for admission.
1/2
WPST21104_18.doc
“5. So far as the present application for amendment of the written statement and prayer to allow to lead additional evidence and to produce the document at appellate stage are concerned, in view of the position settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, such an application shall go with the appeal. During the course of arguments, if it is satisfied that the proposed amendment is necessary for resolving controversy between the parties or the documents sought to be produced are relevant and important for such purpose, then such prayers can very well be considered and appropriate order can be passed in that regard. At this stage, we see absolutely no ground to entertain such type of application.”
(R. G. KETKAR, J.)
MinalSandipParab Digitally signedby Minal SandipParabDate: 2018.09.0405:26:38 -0400
Minal Parab
2/2
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a Writ Petition can be entertained to challenge an Appellate Court order regarding the timing of conclusion of arguments and the disposal of applications for amendment and additional evidence.
Whether the Writ Petitioner has established a case for interference with the Appellate Court's discretion in conducting the appeal according to schedule.
Whether the High Court can direct the Appellate Bench to decide applications for amendment and additional evidence along with the main appeal.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Union of India Vs. Ibrahim UddinExplained¶13
Union of India Vs. Ibrahim Uddin, (2012) 8 SCC 148 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Virji G. Jobanputra
Bhaskar Namdev Khandke (decd) through LRs Premlata B. Khandke and others
R. G. Ketkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
