Interim application in a second appeal pending since 2005 was allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), and the second appeal was directed to be placed on the final hearing board in the week commencing 20 February 2024.
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.
bipin prithiani
1
14-sa-351.05.doc
BIPIN DHARMENDERPRITHIANI Digitally signed by BIPINDHARMENDER PRITHIANIDate: 2024.01.12 18:23:18 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 899 OF 2019 IN
SECOND APPEAL NO. 351 OF 2005 WITH SECOND APPEAL NO. 351 OF 2005
Shalini Shridhar Mhatre … Applicant Versus Subhash Narhari Padate & Ors. … Respondents
… Respondents
Mr. Vivekanand Akshali i/by Smita Mhatre for the Applicant. Ms. Latika Kabad i/by Rohit D. Joshi for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
CORAM: R. N. LADDHA, J.
DATE : 12 JANUARY 2024
P.C. :-
. For the reasons stated in the application and the fact that the appeal is pending since 2005, the Interim Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).
Shalini Shridhar Mhatre
Subhash Narhari Padate
Ors.
R. N. Laddha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
