Restoration application in an appeal from order dismissed earlier for non-removal of office objections; no one appeared for the applicant on two calls, and the application was dismissed for want of prosecution.
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.
Mamta Kale
48-ia-1856-2024 in aost-442-2023.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1856 OF 2024 IN
APPEAL FROM ORDER (ST) NO. 442 OF 2023
Vinodkumar Lalbahadur Singh & Anr. ..Appellants Vs.
The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai K-East Ward ..Respondent
None for the Appellants. Ms. Smita V. Tondwalkar, for the Respondent / MMC.
CORAM : R. N. LADDHA, J. DATE : 2 APRIL 2024
P.C.
MAMTAAMARKALE Digitallysigned byMAMTAAMARKALEDate:2024.04.0216:39:12+0530
. This is an application filed for restoration of the appeal from order and the interim application therein, which was dismissed for non removal of office objections.
R. N. LADDHA, J.
page 1 of 1
Vinodkumar Lalbahadur Singh
The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai K-East Ward
R. N. Laddha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
