The writ petition was disposed of as the petitioner has an alternative remedy by filing an appeal under Section 16 (1) of the Act before the Collector, established by a Divisional Bench decision.
Writ petition disposed with liberty to file an appeal before the Competent Authority.
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.
1
954wp14422.23
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
954 WRIT PETITION NO. 14422 OF 2023 VINAYKUMAR BHIKAMCHAND JAIN
…. Petitioner
VERSUS
BHIKAMCHAND RAGHUNATHMAL JAIN
….. Respondent
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Mr. Patil B.K. AGP for Respondents/State : Mr. S.A.Gaikwad Advocate for Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Mukul S.Kulkarni
CORAM : S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
DATE : 19.12.2023.
PER COURT :
2
954wp14422.23
the Writ Petition shall be excluded while counting the limitation
for filing of the appeal.
( S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR )
JUDGE
mahajansb/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner has an alternative remedy to file an appeal under Section 16 (1) of the Act in view of a Divisional Bench decision.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Writ Petition No. 36 of 2023Referred¶1
1 provisions across 1 enactments
VINAYKUMAR BHIKAMCHAND JAIN
BHIKAMCHAND RAGHUNATHMAL JAIN
S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
