Disposed

M/S. Chaudhari Petroleum Thr. Proprietor, Smt. Sarika W/O Kailash Chaudhari v. Union of India, Thr. Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, New Delhi and Others

Bombay HC23 Feb 2021WP/661/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench disposed of the petition filed by the petitioner challenging show-cause notices issued by the respondent oil corporation. The court allowed the petitioner time to apply for early disposal of the pending civil matter and dispose of the writ petition without concluding the fundamental issue regarding dealership entitlement.

What did the court decide?

Disposed of writ petition, allowing petitioner time to apply for early disposal of pending civil application regarding heirship.

M/S. Chaudhari Petroleum Thr. Proprietor… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

1 / 2 921-WP 661.2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 661 OF 2021

¶3

M/s. Chaudhari Petroleum -- Petitioner vs.

¶4

Union of India and others --Respondents

¶5

Mr. S. G. Shinde Advocate h/f. Mr.Gajanan Shinde, Advocate for Petitioner. Ms. Sushma, Advocate for Respondent No.1.

¶6

CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR & ANIL S. KILOR, JJ. DATE : 23 FEBRUARY 2021

¶7

P. C. :

¶8

The Petitioner is given a dealership to run a petrol pump by Respondent No.2 Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. The Petitioner is challenging the show-cause notices issued by the Respondent No.2 on 8 May 2020 and 23 December 2020. The show-cause notices have been issued in the light of the dispute raised by the Respondent No.3 – mother-in-law of the Petitioner regarding the entitlement of the Petitioner.

¶9

The Petitioner entered into a dealership agreement on 23 April 2019. The Respondent No.3 had contested the said grant of dealership. The Petitioner had applied for heirship certificate, which was challenged by Respondent No.3 and the heirship certificate was set aside.

¶10

2 / 2 921-WP 661.2021

¶11

The Petitioner filed First Appeal in this Court along with application for condonation of delay, which was also rejected. While rejecting the application for condonation of delay, it was observed that an application can be made by joining necessary parties.

¶12

It is the contention of the Petitioner that the Petitioner has filed the application after joining the necessary parties which is pending and therefore, no action be taken against the Petitioner.

¶13

As on today, admittedly there is no heirship certificate in favour of the Petitioner. The challenge of the Petitioner for revocation has failed. If that is a ground of issuing show-cause notices, the action of Respondents cannot be faulted.

¶14

The learned counsel for the Petitioners states that the Petitioner will apply to the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Buldana, where the Civil Miscellaneous Application No.16 of 2021 is pending for early disposal. It is always open to the Petitioner to to do so.

¶15

The learned counsel for the Petitioner states that he will move appropriate representation to Respondent No.2. Since the proceedings are at the stage of show-cause, it is not necessary to conclude further on the issue.

¶16

Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶17

KOLHE

M/S. Chaudhari Petroleum Thr. Proprietor, Smt. Sarika W/O Kailash Chaudhari v. Union of India, Thr. Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, New Delhi and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Chaudhari Petroleum Thr. Proprietor, Smt. Sarika W/O Kailash Chaudhari v. Union of India, Thr. Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, New Delhi and Others

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

Mangesh S/O Sanjay Kanoje Vs Schedule Tribe Caste Scrutiny Committee, Amravati through Member Secretary and Another

Mayuri D/O Vijayrao Bhamkar Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mumbai and Others

Nitin S/O Keshaorao Darvekar and Others Vs Mamta Co-Operative Housing Society, through Its Secretary, Shri Narendra R. Tupkar and Others

Sunil Chandrashekhar Akant Vs the Deputy Director of Education, Nagpur Division, Nagpurand Others

Magasvargiya Education Society, a Registered Society (F496), Thr. Secretary, Yavatmal and Another Vs State of Maha., Thr. Principal Sec., Social Justice and Special Assistance Deptt., Mumbai and Ors.

Radha Ispat through Its Proprietor Shri Sudhar Ishwardayal Gupta Vs the State of Maharashtra through Chief Secretary (Administration) Govt of Maharashtra, Mumbai