The High Court allowed the civil application arising from WP/7101/2019. The court disposed of the matter in terms of the prayer Clause (B) of the application.
Application allowed in terms of prayer Clause (B).
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.
910-CA-10135-19.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10135 OF 2019 IN WP/7101/2019
Sandeep Dnyanoba Patil and Another
.. Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Another
.. Respondents
Mr. A. B. Dhongade, Advocate for Applicants. Mr. K. N. Lokhande, AGP for Respondent No. 1. Mr. M. D. Narwadkar, Advocate for Respondent No. 2.
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA & K. K. SONAWANE, JJ
DATED : 23rd AUGUST, 2019.
PER COURT :-
( K. K. SONAWANE ) ( S. V. GANGAPURWALA ) JUDGE JUDGE
P.S.B.
Sandeep Dnyanoba Patil and Another
The State of Maharashtra and Another
S. V. Gangapurwala
K. K. Sonawane
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
