The High Court of Bombay dismissed a writ petition for non-prosecution as the petitioners did not appear for the final hearing while respondent counsel was present. The rule was discharged with no order as to costs.
Rule discharged with no order as to costs.
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.
WP. 9445-05.odt
VPH
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION No. 9445 OF 2005
Kundanlal Chunilal Khinvasara & Ors. … Petitioners Vs.
Pimpri Chinchwad Mun. Corporation & Anr.… Respondents
None for the Petitioners.
Mr. G. H. Keluskar, for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. V. P. Malvankar, AGP “A” Panel, for the Respondent No. 3.
CORAM : A. S. OKA, & P. N. DESHMUKH, JJ.
DATE : JANUARY 11, 2018 PC :
Vinayak Halemath
Kundanlal Chunilal Khinvasara & Ors.
Pimpri Chinchwad Mun. Corporation
Anr.
Respondent No. 3
A. S. OkA
P. N. Deshmukh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
