Petitioner sought continuation of interim order and liberty to approach competent court after recognizing possible local jurisdiction for property attachment. Court dismissed petition as withdrawn.
Interim order continued for four weeks; property not to be dispossessed pending approach to competent court.
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.
$~14
SH. SHYAM BIHARI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr Manish Jha, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr Amit Mahajan, CGSC with Ms Mallika Hiremath, Advocate for CGSC.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
O R D E R % 05.02.2019
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
FEBRUARY 05, 2019 RK
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be relegated to avail remedies before the appropriate court regarding attachment of property located in Patna.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Aasma Mohammed Farooq & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.Referred¶7
Aasma Mohammed Farooq & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.: W.P.(C) 12494/2018, decided on 05.12.2018
Sh. Shyam Bihari
Union of India
Vibhu Bakhu
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
