The writ petition was dismissed for lack of prosecution as the petitioner failed to appear on multiple consecutive dates.
Petition dismissed for non-prosecution as petitioner failed to appear on consecutive dates.
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.
7 wp 894-15.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 894 OF 2015
Harshad Chintaman Pimple .. Petitioner
v/s.
The Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai & Ors.
..Respondents
None for the Petitioner. Mr. Sagar Patil for the MCGM.
CORAM : RANJIT MORE &
SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ. DATED : JUNE 28, 2018.
P.C. :
March 2018 and on 3rd May, 2018. It is seen that on the last three consecutive dates, none appeared for the petitioner. Today also none
appears for the petitioner. It seems that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter. Hence the petition is dismissed for non prosecution.
(ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.) (RANJIT MORE, J.)
1 of 1
salgaonkar
Harshad Chintaman Pimple
The Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai
Ranjit More
Anuja Prabhudesai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
