BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 4668/2008 (Ashok Jethanand Lakhwani v. Commissioner of Police, Nagpur Region) & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Withdrawn
The writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn
Provisions considered
Judgment
Operative part
Shri N.D. Khamborkar, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Anand Deshpande, A.G.P. for the R-1. Shri S.K. Mishra, counsel for the R-2 to 4. Shri S.A. Kalbande, counsel for the R-5. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : NOVEMBER 09, 2009. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Shri S.K. Mishra, the learned counsel for the respondent nos.2 to 4 states that this writ petition should not be entertained in view of the alternate efficacious remedy which is available under the provisions of Section 387 of the City of Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948. In view of the statement made on behalf of the respondent nos.2 to 4, Shri N.D. Khamborkar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file appropriate proceedings before the Commissioner under the provisions of Section 387 of the Act of 1948. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner would file the appropriate 2 proceedings within a period of fifteen days from the date of this order. prayed for. APTE Permission and liberty, both, are granted as The writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn. JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
City of Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948 — s. 387.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 09 Nov 2009. The bench was VASANTI A NAIK.
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.