The High Court at Goa withdrew a writ petition on a construction dispute after the petitioners had already constructed a compound wall. The petition was disposed of as withdrawn, with counsel instructed to seek amendment of the plaint and mandatory injunction in the concerned court.
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.
4- WP 184 2019
Aura
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA Writ Petition NO.184 of 2019
Sara Mazarello Fernandes and anr.
Petitioners
Versus
Respondents
Mr. J. A. Lobo, Advocate for the Petitioners Mr.Anthony D'Silva, Advocte for the Respondent no2.
CORAM: MANISH PITALE, J DATED: 14th September, 2021
Oral Order ;
1. During the pendency of the present petition, the compound wall in question has been already constructed. In view of this subsequent development, the learned counsel for the petitioners has instructions to withdraw the present writ petition, in order to seek amendment of the plaint and to file an application for temporary mandatory injunction.
2. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of as withdrawn. If the petitioners move the concerned Court seeking amendment of the plaint and for temporary mandatory injunction, the concerned Court shall decide such applications on their own merits.
MANISH PITALE, J.
Page 1 of 2
14th Sept.2021
4- WP 184 2019
Page 2 of 2 14th Sept.2021
Sara Mazarello Fernandes and anr.
Timonthy Pereira
Manish Pitale
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court