On January 13, 2023, the Bombay High Court disposed of Writ Petition No. 8327 of 2022 filed by Satyanarayan Bhavarlal Jakhotiya against Kisan Constructions Pvt. Ltd. as withdrawn, with all contentions kept open.
Writ Petition disposed of as withdrawn.
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.
2.WP.8327.22.doc
S.S.Kilaje
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 8327 OF 2022
Satyanarayan Bhavarlal Jakhotiya .. Petitioner
Versus
Kisan Constructions Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent
Mr. Pradeep Salgar for PetitionerMr. Shrishail Sakhare for RespondentCORAM:MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE:JANUARY 13, 2023.
P.C.:
1. On 10.01.2022 this Court has passed the following order :
“1.Heard Mr. Salgar, learned Advocate for Petitioner and Mr.
Sakhare, learned Advocate for Respondent.
2. Perused the impugned order dated 24.01.2022 passed below
Exh.135 in R.C.S. No.439 of 2013.
3. The Application was filed by the Respondent before the
learned Trial Court seeking to lead evidence in respect of five
documents.
4. Admittedly, all five documents are part of the pleadings
between the parties. This position is not in dispute. The
Application below Exh.30 came to be allowed with finding that
document at Serial Nos.1 to 3 and 5 were exhibited but
document at Serial No.4 was not exhibited.
5. Being aggrieved, Plaintiff (Respondent herein) filed the
Application which was resisted by the Petitioner by filing his say
vide Exh.136.
6. The admitted position is that documents at Serial Nos.4 and
5 are registered sale deeds which find mention in the pleadings.
Learned Trial Court in paragraph No.11 of the impugned order
dated 24.01.2022 has categorically returned the finding that the
said document at Serial No.4 is found referred to in
examination-in-chief in paragraph No.7 of P.W.No.1. Further
P.W.No.1 is also one of the signatory to the said document. In
1 of 2
2.WP.8327.22.doc
that view of matter, the impugned order has been passed.
7. Both the learned Advocates agree that there is a
typographical mistake in paragraph No.12 of the impugned
order in the last line and the words Serial No.3 should be read
as Serial No.4. The said mistake is allowed to be corrected.
8. In view of the above observation and findings, Mr. Salgar
seeks time to consider and inform the Court accordingly on the
next date.
9. Stand over to 13th January, 2023 for orders.”
2. Today at the outset Mr. Salgar, learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner fairly placed on record letter dated 12.01.2023 received from the Petitioner seeking withdrawal of the present Writ Petition, which is marked “X” for identification.
3. Writ Petition disposed of as withdrawn.
4. All contentions of the parties are kept open.
[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
SONALI Digitally signedby SONALI SATISH SATISH KILAJE Date: 2023.01.13 KILAJE 19:40:26 +0530
2 of 2
Satyanarayan Bhavarlal Jakhotiya
Kisan Constructions Pvt. Ltd.
MILIND N. JADHAV
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court