In this writ petition, the Petitioner sought mandamus to secure a decision on registration applications under the Maharashtra Stamp Act. The Respondent-State counsel submitted that orders would be passed within four weeks without retaining original instruments, leading the Court to dispose of the petition.
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.
921-OSWP1764-19.DOC
Shephali
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1764 OF 2019
Sai Siddhant Developers & Anr
Versus
State of Maharashtra & Ors
...Petitioners
...Respondents
Mr Rajiv Narula, i/b Jhangiani Narula & Associates, for the
Petitioners.
Mr HB Takke, AGP, for the Respondent-State.
Mr Prasad Gurnule, Collector of Andheri, present.
CORAM: S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & G.S. PATEL, JJ DATED: 21st August 2019
PC:-
1. Prayer clause (a) of this Writ Petition reads thus:
“That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of
mandamus, a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus directing Respondent No. 2 to decide
Petitioners’ Application dated 16th July 2018 numbered as
ADJ/860099, ADJ/15067, ADJ/873056 & ADJ/46322 of
2018 being Ex. A1 to A5 under Section 31 of the
Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 within a period of four weeks
or within such reasonable time as this Hon’ble Court may
decide and communicate the same to the Petitioners.”
Page 1 of 2 21st August 2019
921-OSWP1764-19.DOC
2.On instructions, the learned AGP says that in relation to
instruments lodged with the Respondents Nos. 2 to 5, the necessary
orders in accordance with law would be passed as expeditiously as
possible and preferably within a period of four weeks from today.
There is no question of then retaining the original instruments. The
Petitioners having obtained the necessary relief or direction, we do
not think that the Writ Petition needs to be kept pending. It is
disposed of.
(S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J)
(G. S. PATEL, J)
Page 2 of 2 21st August 2019
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to issue a writ of mandamus directing the Collector to decide applications under Section 31 of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sai Siddhant Developers & Anr
State of Maharashtra
S. C. Dharmadhikari
G. S. Patel
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court