✦ Bombay High Court · 11 Oct 2005

Jet Airways (India) Pvt. Ltd v. Mr. Mukut Pathak

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

Mr. Mukut Pathak ... Respondent Ms. Vishakha Vaswani, Advocate i/b M/s. V. V. Juris for Appelant. None for the respondent. CORAM : R. M. S. KHANDEPARKAR : R. M. S. KHANDEPARKAR CORAM CORAM : R. M. S. KHANDEPARKAR ANDANDAND D.D.D. G. KARNIK, JJ. G. KARNIK, JJ. G. KARNIK, JJ. DATEDATEDATE : JUNE 7, 2007. : JUNE 7, 2007. : JUNE 7, 2007. PCPCPC :- :- :- . The learned advocate appearing for the appellant states appeal refusal interlocutory injunction Appellant operate 11th October 2005, appeal become infructuous pressed. Appeal therefore is allowed to be withdrawn. No order as to costs. - 2 -

#2. Needless to say that the withdrawal of the appeal will be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of both the parties to the suit and the learned Single Judge hearing the suit shall not be influenced by the prima facie, observations/findings contained in the impugned order and judgment dated 17th April

#2007. Sd/- [D. G. KARNIK, J.] [R.M.S. G. KARNIK, J.] [R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR, J.] KHANDEPARKAR, J.] [D. [D. G. KARNIK, J.] [R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR, J.] Sd/-

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. ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY No. 538 of 2000). ← Search more judgments