Radhabai K. Jadhav v. Parvati K. Jadhav
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Application is dismissed
Provisions considered
Judgment
Operative part
Mr. Suresh Bhosle, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. S. N. Gawade, Advocate for Respondent. : Dr. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. CORAM : Dr. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. CORAM : Dr. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. CORAM : JUNE 23, 2006. DATEDATEDATE : JUNE 23, 2006. : JUNE 23, 2006. P.C.P.C.P.C. . Heard the learned counsel for the Applicant Respondent. In expiry applicant, present application has become infructuous. Hence, the Civil Application is dismissed. [[[ Dr. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.] Dr. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.] Dr. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Application is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
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.