Partly allowed

The Maharashtra State Other Backward Class Finance and Development Corporation Ltd. Thr Dist Manager v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC12 Jul 2019CA/7985/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an application by the applicant seeking an extension of time. The court, noting that procedural steps were taken to obtain an opinion, partly allowed the prayer, granting an extension of eight weeks from the date of the order and clarifying that no further extension would be entertained.

What did the court decide?

Grant of extension of time by eight weeks from the date of the order.

The Maharashtra State Other Backward Class… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

905-CA-7985-19.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7985 OF 2019 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 6677 OF 2016

¶4

Maharashtra State Other Backward Class Finance & Development Corporation Ltd. Through its District Manager

¶5

..APPLICANT

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

State of Maharashtra and Another

¶8

..RESPONDENTS

¶9

Mr. B.B. Yenge, Advocate for applicant Ms. R.P. Gaur, A.G.P. for respondent no.1 – State Mr. A.N. Sabnis, Advocate for respondent no.2

¶10

CORAM : P.B. VARALE AND R.G. AVACHAT, JJ. DATED : 12^th JULY, 2019

¶11

PER COURT :

¶12

Heard Mr. Yenge, learned Counsel for applicant/original

¶13

respondent no.2 in Writ Petition No. 6677 of 2016.

¶14

By inviting our attention to order dated 07^th January, 2019 passed by this Court, then to communication dated 05^th April, 2019 forwarded to learned Joint Secretary, Law and Judicial Department as well communication

¶15

to the Panel Counsel of State, Mr. Yenge, learned Counsel for applicant submitted before us that procedural steps were taken by applicant to seek

¶16

1 / 2

¶17

905-CA-7985-19.odt

¶18

opinion and advise. Mr. Yenge further submitted that opinion is forwarded by learned Counsel for State to take appropriate step by filing review petition.

¶19

Mr. Yenge then submitted that in view of the opinion, applicant has also filed review petition. On these grounds applicant prayed for extension of period by three months.

¶20

Mr. Sabnis, learned Counsel for Respondent No.2/original petitioner opposes the application.

¶21

Considering the factual aspect viz. applicant had approached the authority i.e. Joint Secretary, Law and Judicial Department and learned Panel Counsel of State seeking opinion and in view of opinion expressed by learned Counsel, and is taking appropriate steps, application is partly allowed by grant of extension of time by eight weeks only from today. We make it clear that no prayer for further extension of time would be entertained by this

¶22

Court on any ground. Civil application is accordingly disposed of.

¶23

( R.G. AVACHAT, J. ) ( P.B. VARALE, J. )

¶24

SSD

¶25

2 / 2

The Maharashtra State Other Backward Class Finance and Development Corporation Ltd. Thr Dist Manager v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Maharashtra State Other Backward Class Finance and Development Corporation Ltd. Thr Dist Manager v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaikh Isaq Shaikh Jafar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Ranjana Shivnarayan Nagre Alias Ranjana Ganpat Musale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Abc through Natural Guardian Father Rajendra Jagannath Aglave Vs the Union of India and Others

Balaji Vajinath Bellale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Jitendra Bajilal Sonawane Vs State of Maharashtra and Others

Deepanjali Sadashiv Chaudhari and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others