Writ Petition No. 5408 of 2008 · Bombay High Court
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 25 Jul 2008
- Bench
- A P DESHPANDE
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. The argument placed on behalf of the petitioner is that the application ought to have been allowed as the defendants did not appear before the court. In our view, the order dated 23rd June 2008 cannot be questioned by the petitioner under Article 226…
Judgment
Mr. S.D. Gokhale for the Petitioner. A.P. DESHPANDE, J. CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J., & DATED: 25TH JULY 2008. P.C.:
We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The challenge in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the order dated 23rd June 2008, vide which the learned trial court has rejected the application filed by the present petitioner to pass an ex-parte decree.
The argument placed on behalf of the petitioner is that the application ought to have been allowed as the defendants did not appear before the court. In our view, the order dated 23rd June 2008 cannot be questioned by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner is at liberty to 2 take such other appropriate steps in accordance with the law. The petition is accordingly disposed of. CHIEF JUSTICE A.P. DESHPANDE, J.
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 25 Jul 2008. The bench was A P DESHPANDE.
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.