Dismissed

Mr. Ramavtar Fakir Pancham v. Darbhanga Mansion Co-Op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd.

Bombay HC14 Jul 2023WP/8592/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay held that three writ petitions challenging orders in execution proceedings were infructuous as the underlying appeal was settled and disposed of. The petitions were dismissed due to non-prosecution by the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions were dismissed as infructuous and for non-prosecution with no order as to costs.

Mr. Ramavtar Fakir Pancham Vs Darbhanga… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

901-903 wps 8581,8583,8592.23.doc

¶2

Dusane

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.8581 OF 2023 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.8583 OF 2023 WITH

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.8592 OF 2023

¶6

Ramavtar Fakir Pancham …Petitioner V/s. Darbhanga Mansion Co-op. Housing …Respondent Society Ltd.

¶7

Mr. Piyush A. Singh for Petitioner.

¶8

Mr. Jamshed Master, Counsel a/w Mr. Chirag Sarawagi, Riya Thakkar i/by Mr. Tushar Goradia for Respondent.

¶9

CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATE: 14^th July 2023

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

1. Mr. Jamshed Master, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent states that the dispute between the parties is settled in terms of the consent terms, which were filed before the learned Appellate Court of the Small Causes Court at Mumbai in P. Appeal No. 48 of 2018. He states that accordingly appeal itself has been disposed of in terms of the consent terms.

¶12

¶13

901-903 wps 8581,8583,8592.23.doc

¶14

2. He further states that as far as these Writ Petitions are concerned, the challenge is to the orders passed in execution proceedings. He states that as the said appeal itself has been disposed of, nothing survives in these petitions and have become infructuous.

¶15

3. All these Writ Petitions were listed before the Court as the learned Advocate appearing for the Respondent is constrained to move the matter, as the Petitioner, who has agreed to withdraw the Writ Petitions has not taken further steps.

¶16

4. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent also states that the possession of the suit premises has been recovered from the Petitioner.

¶17

5. Mr. Piyush Singh, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner states that inspite of contacting the Petitioner on number of occasions, the Petitioner is not giving any instructions. Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are dismissed as infructuous and also for non-prosecution with no order as to costs.

¶18

BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE

¶19

(MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE Date: 2023.07.19 10:57:00 +0530

¶21

Mr. Ramavtar Fakir Pancham v. Darbhanga Mansion Co-Op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Ramavtar Fakir Pancham v. Darbhanga Mansion Co-Op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Viva Divine Ventures vs Madhu Jeevan Jyoti Co-Operative Housing Society Limited

Vikas Balasaheb Bhor vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Amal Dilip Desai vs Nilesh Dilip Desai and Anr.

Area Distributors Hp Lubricants Vs Dr. (Mrs.) Gulshan Darius Dastur and Ors.

Mr. Ramavatar Fakir Pancham Vs Darbhanga Mansion Co-Op Hsg Soc. Ltd.

Ramavtar Fakir Pancham Vs Darbhanga Mansion Coop Hsg. Soc. Ltd.