Allowed

Western Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. Kolhapur through Its Director v. Ayodhya Ginning and Pressing Factory through Its Proprietor and Others

Bombay HC12 Dec 2023CA/14805/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court allowed the civil application to recall the order dated 07.12.2023 on the ground that it recorded an apparent mistake regarding the pendency of the execution application. The writ petition was restored.

What did the court decide?

Civil Application allowed; Writ Petition restored to original post and listed for urgent admission.

Western Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. Kolhapur through… — Execution and Attachment | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

1 PB.CA-14805-2023.doc

¶2

2023:BHC-AUG:26096

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14805 OF 2023

¶5

IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 15040 OF 2023
 AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 15040 OF 2023

¶6

WESTERN SPINNING MILLS PVT LTD KOLHAPUR
THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

AYODHYA GINNING AND PRESSING FACTORY
THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR AND OTHERS

¶9

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Tope Sambhaji Subhashrao
Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Mr. Pravin N. Kalani

¶10

 CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.
 DATE : 12th DECEMBER 2023.

¶11

Per Court :

¶12

. Heard.

¶13

1.The applicant seeks to recall order passed on 07.12.2023 by this
Court. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the applicant that he
was under impression that order dated 08.11.2023 passed below
Exhibit-20, was under Rule 21 Rule 97 to 206. The application at
Exhibit-20 was filed by the petitioner/objector in his objection at
Exhibit-23 filed in Regular Darkhast No.35/2023. Application at
Exhibit-23 has not been dealt with by the Executing Court. According
to him, therefore the writ petition is tenable.

¶14

¶15

PB.CA-14805-2023.doc

¶16

2.It is apparent from the papers that by the order dated 08.11.2023,
the application under Order 21 Rule 97, 98, 99, 100 of CPC has not
been rejected. The application filed by the applicant is yet to be
considered by the Executing Court. Therefore order dated 08.11.2023
is not a decree. The writ petition is tenable. I find that it is an
apparent mistake on record which needs to be rectified.

¶17

3. The Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘D’ and the Writ Petition is restored to its original post.

¶18

4. List the writ petition for consideration in urgent admission category on 19.12.2023.

¶19

 [ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.]

¶20

Najee b .

Western Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. Kolhapur through Its Director v. Ayodhya Ginning and Pressing Factory through Its Proprietor and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Western Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. Kolhapur through Its Director v. Ayodhya Ginning and Pressing Factory through Its Proprietor and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

New India Assurance Company Limited, through It S Autorized Signatory, Aurangabad Vs Latabai Ramdas Alias Rama Gaikwad and Other

Priyanka Kunal Wasnik Vs Kunal Sukhadeoji Wasnik

Namrata Yuvraj Mastud Vs Yuvraj Baburao Mastud

Nur Sajan Shaikh and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra through the Collector Latur and Anr.

Vithal Laxman Khaje and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra through the Collector Latur and Anr.

M/S Mahalaxmi Constructions through Its Proprietor Dhananjay Sharadrao Tawar Vs Suwarna Babasaheb Ghuge and Others