Review application in a partition/RAST matter; parties present and identified, original suit already compromised and disposed of by trial court. Review applicant sought withdrawal, which the High Court permitted.
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.
2024:BHC-AUG:26788
1 CA7705.2024+
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
948 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7705 OF 2024
WITH
RAST/19219/2024
MOHANLAL PANNALAJI JANGADA VERSUS
ARVIND PANNALALJI JANGADA AND OTHERS
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Fulfagar Anuj Ajay AGP for Respondents: Mr. Advocate for Respondent No.1 :
Mr. A. P. Bhandari h/f. Mr. V. A. Bagadiya
Advocate for Respondent No.2 :
Mr. Ganesh Gadhe h/f. Mr. A. S. Jadhav
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8738 OF 2024 IN RAST/19219/2024
CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. DATE : 12th NOVEMBER, 2024
PER COURT:
counsel for respondent no.1 submits that the Review Applicant / Defendant No.3 – Mohanlal Pannalalji Jangada, Defendant No.1 – Arvind Pannalalji Jangada and Original Plaintiff – Sureshchandra Pannalalji Jangada are present in the court. They are identified in terms of their Aadhaar Card. The originals are returned back and the copies of the same are taken on record. The parties are also identified by the respective
2 CA7705.2024+
advocates. The learned counsel for the parties submits that the original suit is itself compromised and disposed of and the trial court has recorded the compromise. In view of the same, the learned counsel submits that he would seek withdrawal of the present review application.
[ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.]
marathe
Mohanlal Pannalaji Jangada
Arvind Pannalalji Jangada
Sureshchandra Pannalalji Jangada
Arun R. Pedneker
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
