The Division Bench held that an office reference filed in 2003 could not remain pending due to the petitioner's unexpected passing and the subsequent unavailability of the real estate department officer concerned. The reference was dropped.
The office reference was dropped.
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.
§
£1111 MATTER o?
I
»:
E! . / smt'é"‘?um‘i,‘ :. Jf 7L > : i.
L
am um simm’ /
‘
05 2003.
!1 , ~ _ 11x ' ,
l ll Arising cut of VHF?
’
, 1741 2003 order aw. 01/11/2003;
‘passled
by Hon'ble Justice
Eaknkuddin J.r¢£ c-.G. Hi§h
:
Bila‘spuro
Registered as.M.C .C.
bove‘ oxdexu
37r1 arm—0W WNW; Warm?
W“ mMccNMéte/gw 2“
WW m (yawn mm afar 311w ”Kw—17¢ mm L1 amt nor? I? awn I”?! i S K AGARWAL ‘B‘ HON’BLE MRJUSTICE 1 3 os 20L l i This is an office referen Shri G .D. Vaswani, Govt Advooiate forthe State. l This court, while hearng the} Writ Petitiqn Ng. 174742ooe, observed that the true facts ere s‘ in the petition by the petitioner—PunmBal and ther fore s ‘pressede was caifed to fite reply ConSIdenng the facts that the tter ls pending slnce 2003, no notice coutd be sewed upon t e petltl er till now and the wnt petrtlon has already been disposed at l do n t find any reason to keep this l M C C pending ‘ lI / l l SdlIn View of above, thereference lél dropped, T N. K. Agarwarl” Jy l r Judge r l l l l l l l
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an office reference filed under Section 10(4) of the Maharashtra Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act should be allowed to remain pending given the death of the petitioner in 2003.
Union of India
State of Maharashtra
D. Basu
N. K. Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
