M/s. South Konkan Distilleries, a partnership firm constituted and registered under v. Prabhakar Gajanan Naik
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 17 Jul 2003
- Bench
- F I REBELLO
Provisions considered
Judgment
1. M/s. South Konkan Distilleries, a partnership firm constituted and registered under the Indian Partnership Act with its Office at Virginkar building, Opp. Rajendra Prasad Stadium, Navelim, Margao, Goa.
2. Shivdas Gajanan Naik, son of Gajanan Naik, of major age, businessman, residing above Goa Liquor Industries, Khareband Road, Margao, Goa. V/s.
Prabhakar Gajanan Naik, son of Gajanan Naik, major in age, businessman with office Near Railway Gate, Navelim, Margao, Goa.
Premanand Gajanan Naik, son of Gajanan Naik, of major age, businessman, residing above Goa Liquor Industries, Khareband Road, Margao, Goa.
Satchit Gajanan Naik, son of Gajanan Naik, of major age, businessman, residing above Goa Liquor Industries, Khareband Road, Margao, Goa.
Tulshidas Gajanan Naik, son of Shri Gajanan Naik, major in age, businessman with Office at Naik Trading Corpora- tion, near Railway Gate, Margao, Goa. ... Petitioners. ..... Respondents. Mr. S.G. Bhobe, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. A.D. Bhobe, Advocate for respondent No.1. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO, J. DATE : JULY 17, 2003. ORAL JUDGMENT : - 2 - Heard learned Counsel for the parties. This revision is directed against the order which was passed on 5.2.2001. Subsequent to that, Section 115 of the C.P.C. stands amended by the Amendment Act of 1999. A Single Judge of this Court had taken a view that even pending revision applications would be governed by the provisions of Section 115 as amended. The Apex Court in Shiv Shakti Co-op. Housing Society, Nagpur vs. M/s. Swaraj Developers and ors. has upheld the Judgment of this Court. Considering that, in my opinion, the revision as filed, considering the amendment to 115, would not be maintainable and consequently, dismissed as not maintainable. F.I. REBELLO, J. ssm.
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Partnership Act; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 115.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 17 Jul 2003. The bench was F I REBELLO.
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.