Appeal from order concerning a suit; after leave was granted to delete respondent no.3, the court disposed of the appeal by requesting the trial court to decide the suit on merits expeditiously, preferably within six months, with respondents restrained from creating third-party interests meanwhile.
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.
SMITA Digitally signed by SMITA JOHNSON JOHNSON GONSALVESDate: 2024.04.04 GONSALVES 10:21:08 +0530
11.ao303-22.doc
sg
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 303 OF 2022
WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2210 OF 2022 IN
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 303 OF 2022
Mr Iqbal Ebrahim Khan & Ors. ...Appellants/Applicants vs.
Anutej Construction Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents
Mr S.G. Deshmukh, i/b. Abhijeet Kandarkar, for the Appellants.
Mr Zamir J. M. Shaikh, i/b. L. C. Tolat & Co, for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
CORAM : R.N. LADDHA, J.
DATE : 3 APRIL 2024
P.C. :
. In view of the affidavit filed by respondent no.2, stating therein that respondent no.3 is no longer associated with the affairs of respondent no.1 Company, learned Counsel for the appellants seeks leave to delete the name of respondent no.3 from the array of this appeal.
1 / 2
11.ao303-22.doc
sg
of.
2 / 2
1 issue framed by the court
Should the appeal be disposed of by directing the trial court to decide the underlying suit expeditiously within six months?
Mr Iqbal Ebrahim Khan & Ors.
Anutej Construction Pvt. Ltd.
Respondent No.2
R.N. Laddha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court