✦ Bombay High Court

Parikh Enterprises & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Case at a glance

Outcome

Dismissed

thereof, Petition is dismissed for want of prosecution

Key paragraphs

  • Para 11. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners states that there are no instructions from the Petitioners. In view thereof, Petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. (V.C.DAGA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)

Judgment

Ms.Priyanka Patil i/by M/s.Desai, Berjis & Chinoy for the Petitioners. Mr.P.S.Jetley i/by Mr.H.P.Chaturvedi for Respondents. CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, & CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, & CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, & V.C.DAGA, JJ. V.C.DAGA, JJ. V.C.DAGA, JJ. ATE : 6th June, 2007. ATE : 6th June, 2007. ATE : 6th June, 2007. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.:

#1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners states that there are no instructions from the Petitioners. In view thereof, Petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. (V.C.DAGA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 1441 of 1988). ← Search more judgments