The High Court of Bombay Bench Aurangabad disposed of a writ petition by modifying the impugned order following the amendment and deletion of Section 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure (Maharashtra Amendment).
Impugned order dated 19/10/2016 set aside; application Exhibit 26 disposed off.
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.
904-wp-3380-17.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 3380 OF 2017
RAMESH GANPATRAO MISKIN AND ANOTHER VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Advocate for the Petitioners : Shri R. R. Karpe AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 : Shri S.K.Tambe Advocate for Respondent No.3 : Shri A.M. Gholap Advocate for Respondent Nos. 4-A to 4-D, 4-F : Shri L.B.Palod.
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. DATED : 03rd JULY, 2018.
PER COURT :
904-wp-3380-17.odt
2
matter, if not already framed, if any jurisdiction issue is to be framed, the Trial Court would consider the same in view of the Order 14 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure and all issues would then be dealt with together while deciding the suit.
(RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)
shp/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petition can be disposed of by modifying the impugned order following the amendment of Section 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure (Maharashtra Amendment).
2 provisions across 1 enactments
RAMESH GANPATRAO MISKIN
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
OTHERS
RAVINDRA V. GHUGE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
