A writ petition was filed challenging a registration matter. The appellant counsel submitted that the petition had become infructuous due to the setting of the upset price beyond the validity period and settlement with the bank, requesting withdrawal.
The Writ Petition was disposed of as it became infructuous.
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.
25-WP-11562-2016.doc
Arjun
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.11562 OF 2016
M/s. Bharat Udyog Ltd. & Ors. ...Petitioners Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents
Mr. Anil D’souza, for the Petitioners. Smt. V. S. Nimbalkar, AGP, for the State.
CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATE : 3rd OCTOBER, 2022
P.C. :
states that, the impugned order in the present Writ Petition is dated 29th August, 2016 by which Respondent No. 2 i.e. the Divisional Joint Registrar has fixed the upset price. He points out third Proviso to Rule 107 (11) (f) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961 which provides that upset price approved by the Registrar shall be valid for six months from the date of approval. He submits that, therefore, by efflux of time, the challenge in the said order has become infructuous.
1/2
25-WP-11562-2016.doc
(MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.)
Digitally signed by ARJUN ARJUN VITTHAL VITTHAL KUDHEKAR KUDHEKAR Date: 2022.10.04 19:11:50 +0530
2/2
M/s. Bharat Udyog Ltd. & Ors.
State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Madhav J. Jamdar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
