Dismissed
Subhash Suganlal Runwal and Ors. v. Tarun v Shah and Ors.
Bombay HCWP/13399/2018
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
Writ petition dismissed as infructuous due to pendency of appeal.
What the court decided
AI extract
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.
52-wp-13399-2018.doc
SA Pathan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.13399 OF 2018
SHABNOORAYUBPATHAN Digitallysigned bySHABNOORAYUBPATHANDate:2023.12.0510:23:03+0530
Subhash Sugnlal Runwal & Ors … Petitioners V/s. Tarun V. Shah & Ors … Respondents
Mr. R. D. Soni i/by Ram & Company, for Petitoners. Mr. V. R. Kasale, for Respondent No.4. Mr. Jitendra Sachhdev, for Respondent Nos.2A, 2B & 3. Mr. Freddy i/by V. S. Kapse, for Respondent No.1.
CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : DECEMBER 4, 2023
P.C.:
(AMIT BORKAR, J.)
1
SHABNOORAYUBPATHAN
Tarun V. Shah
AMIT BORKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court