✦ Bombay High Court

Uka Tappu Rathod @ Waghari & Anr. v. Ramesh Banwarilal Agarwal & Ors.

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

Uka Tappu Rathod @ Waghari & Anr. ...Plaintiffs Versus Ramesh Banwarilal Agarwal & Ors. ...Defendants And Smt. Champaben Uka Rathod & Anr. ...Respondents ...... Mr.D.C.Shah for Plaintiffs. Mr.R.V.Jain for Defendants 1 & 2. Mr.M.U.Pandey for Respondent No.2. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. AUGUST 24, 2005. AUGUST 24, 2005. AUGUST 24, 2005. P.C.P.C. P.C.

#1. Not on Board. Upon mentioning, taken on Board.

#2. Applicants/Plaintiffs are not pressing : 2 : this Chamber Summons against Defendants 3 to 5. Other Defendants are appearing through respective Counsel.

#3. As no objection is given by the other Defendants for granting the present Chamber Summons, Chamber Summons made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b) by consent.

#4. Amendments be carried out within four weeks from today. No order as to costs. A.M.KHANWILKAR, 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 more judgments