The High Court of Judicature at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad dismissed the writ petition of Datta Chhaghanao Shingare for want of prosecution. The petitioner failed to appear despite sufficient time to amend the petition and despite the absence of their advocate in the required court session.
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.
666.02WP
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.666 OF 2002
...
DATTA CHHAGANRAO SHINGARE
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
...
CORAM: S.S. SHINDE AND
S.M.GAVHANE, JJ.
DATE : 24.02.2018
ORDER:
1]On earlier occasion i.e. on 18th August,
2017, none appeared for the petitioner.
2]It appears that sufficient time was
granted to the petitioner for amending the
Petition, however, no steps were taken. We have
noticed that the Advocate appearing for the
petitioner was present in the morning session in
some other matter. However, when the matter was
called out in the morning session, none appeared
for the petitioner. Even in the afternoon session,
none appears for the petitioner. Hence, the
Petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Rule stands discharged.
DDC
[S.M.GAVHANE] [S.S.SHINDE]
JUDGE JUDGE
DATTA CHHAGANRAO SHINGARE
UNION OF INDIA
S.S. SHINDE
S.M. GAVHANE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court