Writ Petition No. 8371 of 2003 · Bombay High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Shri Jawahar Balwant Mantri : Petitioner V/s. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Walva, Dist. Sangli & Ors. : Respondents ... Mr.A.M.Kulkarni for the petitioner. Mr.Y.D.Mulani, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for the respondents. ... CORAM : S.RADHAKRISHNAN & S.A.BOBDE, JJ. December 7, 2004. P.C.:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader for the respondents.
Rule, returnable forthwith. Mr.Mulani, learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader waives service for the respondents.
By this petition, the petitioner is seeking payment of compensation in terms of the award dated 29.6.1981 passed under the Bombay Personal Inams Abolition Act, 1952. We 2 have also perused the affidavit-in-reply dated 19.11.2004 filed on behalf of the respondents. It appears that the entire record was misplaced in the office of the Sub-Divisional Office, Walava, District Sangli. In the said affidavit, it is mentioned that the said office will reconstruct the file in the above matter and decide the case of the petitioner within a period of three months. Under these circumstances, nothing further survives in this Petition. The respondents are directed to decide the claim of the petitioner within a period of three months from today.
The rule is made absolute in the above terms. In the event the petitioner is aggrieved, he is at liberty to file a fresh petition. Sd/- (S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) Sd/-
(S.A. BOBDE, J.)
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bombay Personal Inams Abolition Act, 1952.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 07 Dec 2004. The bench was S A BOBDE, S RADHAKRISHNAN.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.