Writ petition challenging a 2015 order became infructuous after the underlying main petition was disposed of in 2017. Counsel reported the petitioner was not giving instructions, and the court dismissed the petition for want of interest.
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.
KVM
1/2
26 - WP 3933 OF 2016.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
KANCHAN Digitally signed byKANCHAN VINOD VINOD MAYEKAR MAYEKAR Date: 2024.02.0812:10:09 +0530
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 3933 OF 2016
Mr. Vijay Kumar Gupta
….. Petitioner
VERSUS
Geeta Vijay Gupta
….. Respondent
Mr. Siddharth Singh a/w. Mr.Anand Mishra i/b. Mr.R.R.Varma for
the Petitioner.
CORAM: RAJESH S. PATIL, J.
DATE : 5 FEBRUARY, 2024
P.C. :-
This writ petition challenges an order dated 28
October,2015 passed in Application No. 422 of 2014 in Petition
No. A-948 of 2014.
2. Mr.Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that during the pendency of this writ petition, the main
petition i.e. Petition No. A-948 of 2014 has been disposed of by
an order dated 14 March, 2017 as the same was uncontested.
KVM
2/2
26 - WP 3933 OF 2016.doc
3. Mr.Singh submits that inspite of their several request, the
petitioner has not contacted him to give further instructions in
the matter.
4. Writ petition is dismissed as the petitioner is not interested
in contesting this matter.
[RAJESH S. PATIL, J.]
Vijay Kumar Gupta
Geeta Vijay Gupta
Rajesh S. Patil
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court