All Cases

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.703 OF 2014 Sheikh Mahmud Aalam ... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Ms.Anjali Awasthi for the Applicant Mr.Y.M. Nakhawa APP, for Respondent – State CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE: JUNE 10, 2014 P.C.: The application is moved for transit anticipatory bail as the applicant/accused is prosecuted for the offences punishable under sections 302 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code as the offence is registered at C.R. No.2 of 2014. The learned Counsel for the applicant/accused has submitted that the applicant/accused is not aware of the prosecution as he is a permanent resident of Mumbai. When the proceedings have been initiated under section 82 of the Criminal Procedure Code by the concerned Court, his father came to know about the involvement of the accused in the said crime and, therefore, he was informed accordingly. The Learned Counsel has submitted that if the applicant/accused is protected temporarily for eight days, he would go before the appropriate Court and obtain anticipatory bail. He submitted that the applicant/accused is falsely implicated. Learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He has pointed out that the FIR is registered on 3.1.2014 at Shahganj police station, District Jaunpur in Uttar Pradesh. The name of the applicant/accused is appearing in the FIR. He submitted that it is a case of murder and hence, no anticipatory bail should be granted. In view of the submissions of the learned Counsel and the complaint, I am not inclined to grant transit anticipatory bail to the applicant/accused. The applicant/accused to take proper recourse before the appropriate forum. Anticipatory Bail Application is rejected accordingly. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

Order - Status 8: Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3097 OF 2004 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.20874 OF 2004 Vimal Chandrakant Shah & Ors. ...Applicants V/s. Surendra Dhanji Shah & Ors. ...Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3099 OF 2004 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.20878 OF 2004 Vima Vimal Chandrakant Shah & Ors. Applicants V/s. Hansa Hansa Jayendra Shah & Ors. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3101 OF 2004 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.21020 OF 2004 Vimal Chandrakant Shah & Ors. ...Applicants V/s. Bindu Kiran Sampat & Ors. ...Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3103 OF 2004 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.20891 OF 2004 Vimal Chandrakant Shah & Ors. ...Applicants V/s. Pramila Dhirajlal Parekh & Ors. ...Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3105 OF 2004 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.20881 OF 2004 V Vimal Chandrakant Shah & Ors. ant Shah & C Applicants 3 V/s. Sı Surendra Dhanji Shah & Ors. i Shah & Ors Respondents ΞS WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3109 OF 2004 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.21002 OF 2004 Vimal Chandrakant Shah & Ors. ...Applicants V/s. Tersih Keshavji Raigoga & Ors. ...Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3116 OF 2004 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.21007 OF 2004 Vima Vimal Chandrakant Shah & Ors. Applicants V/s. Bind Bindu Kiran Sampat & Ors. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3118 OF 2004 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.21013 OF 2004 Vimal Chandrakant Shah & Ors. ...Applicants V/s. Kumud Tersih Raigoga & Ors. ...Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3120 OF 2004 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.21016 OF 2004 Vimal Chandrakant Shah & Ors. ...Applicants V/s. Sangeet Vinay Raigoga & Ors. ...Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3122 OF 2004 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.20869 OF 2004 V imal Cha Vimal Chandrakant Shah & Ors. . Shah & Or s. Applicants V/s. J ayendra Jayendra Dhanji Shah & Ors. hah & Ors. Respondents Mr.Vimal Chandrakant Shah, Applicant, present in person. . Mr.Ramesh Jain, Advocate, for the Respondents. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. DATE : 21ST JANUARY, 2008. P.C.: Heard applicant appearing in person and Advocate for the original plaintiff. The impugned decree is a money decree passed in a Summary Suit. Hence, execution of the said decree cannot be stayed unless the entire decretal amount is deposited by the applicant. Hence, Application is disposed of by passing following order:- "O R D E R" (a). There will be interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a) subject to condition of applicant depositing the entire decretal amount with the Trial Court within a period of six weeks from today. (b). If the entire decretal amount is not deposited with the Trial Court within stipulated time, the interim stay will stand vacated without further reference to the Court. (c). If decretal amount is deposited within stipulated time, the Trial Court will permit the original plaintiff to withdraw the said amount on furnishing adequate security. [ABHAY S. OKA, J.]

Order - Status 5: 924 wp 1885.16.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1885 OF 2016 M/s. N. F. Construction … Petitioner Vs State of Maharashtra. ... Respondent Mr. Subhas Jha a/w Mr. S. A. Vaidya i/b. M/s. Law Global Advocates for the Petitioner. Mr. H. J. Dedhia, APP for State. … CORAM : B. R. GAVAI & DR. SHALINI PHANSALKARJOSHI, JJ. DATE : 25 MAY, 2016 VACATION COURT P.C. : Issue notice returnable on 8th June 2016. (DR. SHALINI PHANSALKARJOSHI, J.) (B. R. GAVAI, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1885 OF 2016 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1886 OF 2016 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1887 OF 2016 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1888 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memorandam of appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders …... Mr. Subhash Jha i/b. M/s. Law Global, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. D.P. Adsule, APP for the Respondent – State in W.P.1885 and 1888 of 2016. Mr. K. V. Saste, APP in W.P. No.1886 of 2016. Mr. J. P. Yagnik, APP in W.P. No.1887 of 2016. …... CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL AND P.D. NAIK, JJ. DATED : JUNE 8, 2016. P.C. : The learned counsel Mr.Jha appearing for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw these petitions with liberty. Leave is granted. Petitions are disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. (P.D. NAIK, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 6006 OF 2021 Noman Gulam Haider Shaikh … Petitioner V/s. The State Of Maharashtra … Respondent None for Petitioner. Mr. S. S. Hulke APP, for Respondent-State. CORAM : A.S. GADKARI AND MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. th DATE : 10 NOVEMBER, 2022. P.C. : Learned APP on instructions from Additional Senior Jailor, Mumbai Central Prison, Mumbai submitted that, by an Order dated 22nd March, 2022 passed by City Civil and Sessions Court Mumbai, Appellant has been acquitted from the case and has been released from jail on 23rd March, 2022. In view thereof, present Petition has become infructuous and is accordingly disposed off. [MILIND N. JADHAV, J.] [A.S. GADKARI, J.]

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (ST.)NO.15103 OF 2018 Shyamlal Sampatraj Soni & Anr. .. Petitioners Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. .. Respondent …... Mr.Vijay V. Sonawane, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr.Shashank N. Fadia, Advocate for Respondent. CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE AND PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ. (VACATION COURT) DATED : MAY 30, 2018. …... P.C. : After having heard Mr.Sonawane, learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court was inclined to show indulgence subject to condition that applicant depositing an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- through a Demand Draft in this Court by 1st June, 2018. The petitioner is not agreeable to the said condition. Mr.Fadia, learned counsel for the respondent has informed that the outstanding against the petitioners are to the tune of Rs.57,00,000/-. According to him, the petitioners have already approached DRT Mumbai vide Securitisation Application No.85 of 2018, wherein similar prayer was already rejected on 7th March, 2018. He has tendered copy of the order passed by the DRT Mumbai to that effect. 2 When confronted, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he has no instructions on the said issue as to whether the petitioners have approached DRT Mumbai in the matter or not. Be that as it may, having regard to the fact that the petitioners have already approached the DRT Mumbai and appropriate remedy is available to the petitioners against the order of DRT Mumbai passed on 7th May, 2018, we are not inclined to cause any interference. Writ Petition is dismissed. (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) ( NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 448 OF 2016 Shri Dastageer Karim Chougule ....Appellant V/S Shri Rajaram Dinkar Khot And Anr ....Respondent None present. CORAM : VIRENDRASINGH GYANSINGH BISHT, J DATE : 30th January, 2020 P.C. : Stand over to 27/02/2020 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 448 OF 2016 Shri Dastageer Karim Chougule ....APPELLANT V/S Shri Rajaram Dinkar Khot And Anr ....RESPONDENT None for parties CORAM : HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH J DATE : 27th September, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 25/10/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.448 OF 2016. —————— —————— Dastageer Karim Chougule ...Appellant. Versus Rajaram Dinkar Khot and Anr. ...Respondents. None for the Appellant. Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J. Date : 25th October, 2024. P. C. : 1. None appears for the appellant. Even on the last ocassion, none had appeared for the appellant. 2. Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. In view of disposal of appeal, Interim/Civil Applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and stand disposed of. [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]

Order - Status 2: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 3: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3258 OF 2021 D.T.Ed., B.Ed.Students' Association of the State of Maharashtra ….. Petitioner VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ….. Respondents Mr.S.A.Rajeshirke for the Petitioner. Mrs.P.J.Gavhane, A.G.P. for the State. CORAM: R. D. DHANUKA AND R.I.CHAGLA, JJ. DATE : 26th JULY, 2021 (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) P.C:- The grievance of the petitioner in this petition is that there are about 180 vacant posts for teachers to be filled up in the nigh school. The Government however is appointing the teachers on temporary basis in violation of the Government Resolution dated 17th May, 2017. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to serve the respondents through the Office of the Government Pleader during the course of the day. Affidavit in reply, if any, shall be filed within three weeks from 28 - WP 3258 OF 2021.doc today with a copy to be served upon the petitioner's advocate simultaneously. Rejoinder, if any, shall be filed within one week from the date of service of the affidavit in reply with a copy to be served upon the respondents' advocates simultaneously. Place the matter on board on 20th August, 2021 . [R.I.CHAGLA, J.] [R. D. DHANUKA, J.]

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION 1 WRIT PETITION NO. 3258 OF 2021 D.T.Ed, B.Ed. Students through President Shri Santosh A. Magar … Petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent ****** Mr. S. A. Rajeshirke for the Petitioners. Ms. Sushma S. Bhende, AGP for the State-Respondent. ****** CORAM: R. D. DHANUKA AND ABHAY AHUJA, JJ. DATE : 24th NOVEMBER, 2021. P.C. :- . The grievance of the petitioners' association is that though by Government Resolution dated 17th May, 2017, the State Government had withdrawn permission to Day School teachers to work in Night School and the validity of the said Government Resolution is upheld by the judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No. 5989 of 2017 and Writ Petition (L) No. 1541 of 2017, which judgment was upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 17th April, 2018, the State Government is still continuing to appoint teachers in the Night School on temporary basis thereby affecting the studies of large number of students. It is the case of the petitioners that teachers shall be appointed on permanent basis in the Night School. Ms. Bhende, learned AGP seeks time to take instruction and to file affidavit within four weeks from today. As and by way of last indulgence, respondents are granted four weeks' time to file affidavitin-reply with a copy to be served upon the petitioners' advocate simultaneously. Rejoinder, if any shall be filed within one week thereafter with a copy to be served upon the respondents' advocate simultaneously. In the meanwhile, in view of the serious allegations made by the petitioners that contrary to the Government Resolution dated 17th May, 2017, the Night Schools are appointing the teachers and staff on temporary basis, the Director of Education shall look into these allegations seriously and to assess the situation in the Night Schools and shall indicate in the affidavit about the correctness of the allegations made by the petitioners in this petition. If it is found that the Night Schools are appointing the teachers and staff on temporary basis and not complying with the Government Resolution issued by the State Government, an appropriate action in that regard shall be taken before the next date. The action that would be taken by the State Government, shall also indicate in the affidavit-in-reply. Place the matter on board for admission on 5th January, 2022. If there are any other connected matters, parties are at liberty to furnish the list of such matters to the Sheristedar of this Court to include those matters also on board on the next date. If the said list is furnished within one week from today, those matters also shall be placed on board on the assigned date. [ABHAY AHUJA, J.] [R. D. DHANUKA, J.]

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3258 OF 2021 D.T. Ed., B.Ed. Students' Association of the State of Maharashtra …..Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. …..Respondents. Mr. S.A. Rajeshirke for the Petitioner. Mrs. S.S. Bhende, AGP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR AND AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ. DATE : 5 JANUARY 2022. (THROUGH- VIDEO CONFERENCING) P.C.:- The learned counsel for the Petitioner states that, the Petitioner is seeking implementation of the Government Resolution dated 17 May 2017 more particularly clauses 4(1) and 4(2) thereof. He states that, certain teachers are working as full time and day time teachers, as well as, in the night schools thereby, reducing the chances of unemployed teachers to be appointed. He states that, subsequently permanent appointment of these teachers in the night schools has been cancelled but they are continuing on a temporary basis. The prayer is sought that, these teachers who are working in the night schools on temporary basis, should be removed and the teachers on permanent basis should be appointed (not on double post). As an interim relief, it is also sought that their salary be stopped. The first relief sought for is directly affected these persons. 2 The learned counsel for the Petitioner states that, as per his knowledge, there are around 180 such teachers/persons and will join them either through their organization and/or 10 to 12 of such teachers as a representatives in this Petition. Leave granted to the Petitioner to amend the Petition to join party Respondents as above. Amendment to be carried out within a period of one week from today. After the amendment is carried out, the Petitioner will give notice to the newly added Respondents and file affidavit of service. 3 As regards the oral argument made on malafides based on interference of a political person, we do not find any pleadings in the Petition nor such person is made party Respondent, therefore this argument cannot be considered. 4 Stand over to 27 January 2022. 5 In the meanwhile, the State will file its response as to why it is not implementing its own Government Resolution dated 17 May 2017, which has been upheld upto the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Affidavit shall be filed by the Secretary School Education Department, State of Maharashtra either by himself or vetted by him. (AMIT B. BORKAR, J.) (NITIN JAMDAR, J.)

Order - Status 13: Arun IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3258 OF 2021 DT Ed, B Ed Students through President Santosh A Magar …Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra through Secretary, School Education and Sports Department …Respondent Mr SA Rajeshirke *, for the Petitioner.* Mr SB Kalel, AGP *, for the Respondent-State.* CORAM G.S. Patel & Neela Gokhale, JJ. DATED: 27th March 2023 PC:- 1. We are not inclined to interfere at the instance of this Petitioner. It claims to be an association of DT.Ed and B.Ed students. ARUN RAMCHNDRA SANKPAL Digitally signed by ARUN RAMCHNDRA SANKPAL Date: 2023.03.28 09:44:42 +0530 2. Prayer clause (c) of this Petition seeks inter alia a direction to the State Government to withhold the government salary grants in respect of teachers on a temporary basis and to direct "the management" to make payments of such salaries. 3. No management is joined. None of the teachers who would undoubtedly be affected by such an order are joined. 4. It is impossible to entertain such a Petition where persons who are directly affected are not even joined or given notice. Whatever may be the case regarding day schools or night schools, it is not possible to grant or consider relief in the absence of the joinder of persons directly affected. Given the ambit of the relief sought, it is not even possible to join individual persons. 5. The Petition is rejected. There will be no order as to costs. It is, however, open to an individual affected to file a petition in her or his own name, and the rejection of this Petition will not be read adversely to such a petitioner. (Neela Gokhale, J) (G. S. Patel, J)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7120 OF 2018 Mrs. Usha Shantaram Wadkar ....Petitioner V/S Saraswati Ganpatrao Yadav (decd) Thro. Lr. Raghunath Yadav (decd) Through Lrs. And Ors ....Respondent Indrajeet Anandrao Bhosale For Petitioner V.S.Talkute i/b. Jayprakash Shridhar Kapre Resp No. 2a To 2e, 3a To 3e, 4a To 4c, 6 To 8 For Respondent CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J DATE : 5th July, 2018 P.C. : Not on board. Taken on production board, by way of praecipe. No orders. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: VRJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7120 OF 2018 VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV Date: 2024.12.04 16:54:31 +0530 Usha Shantaram Wadkar … Petitioner V/s. Saraswati Ganpatrao Yadav (Since Deceased) & Ors. … Respondents None for the petitioner. Ms. Rupika Narkar i/by Mr. Vishwanth Talkute for respondent No.7. CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : DECEMBER 4, 2024 P.C.: None for the petitioner. The writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (AMIT BORKAR, J.)

Order - Status 4: NITIN DINKAR JAGTAP Digitally signed by NITIN DINKAR JAGTAP Date: 2021.10.09 12:06:01 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6555 OF 2021 Shakerabanu Afsar Patel … Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. … Respondents Mr.S.G.Kudle for the Petitioner. Mr.S.B.Kalel, AGP for the State. Mr.Saurabh Oka for Respondent No. 8. CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA, & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : 8TH OCTOBER, 2021 P.C. : The Respondents shall file their respective Affidavits-in-Reply within a period of one week from today. Stand over to 18th October, 2021. (MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ) ( S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. )

Order - Status 6: 69.6555-21-wp.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6555 OF 2021 Shakerabanu Afsar Patel ….. Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ….. Respondents Mr. S.G.Kudale for the petitioner Mr.Prashant Suryawansh i/b Mr.G.M.Savagave for the respondents Smt.A.A.Purav, A.G.P. for the State Mr.Saurabh Oak for the respondent no.1 CORAM: S.V. GANGAPURWALA & VINAY JOSHI, JJ. DATED : APRIL 12, 2022 P.C. The learned counsel for the petitioner was apprised of the fact that the order that is sought to be challenged is passed in Second Appeal. The proper procedure is to move the second appellate court if the petitioner feels that fraud is being played by the respondents. The order passed in Second Appeal i.e. Civil Court cannot be challenged by way of Writ Petition. The Second Appeal is under the Civil Jurisdiction. The order is passed below Exhibit 1 in Regular TRUSHA TUSHAR MOHITE Digitally signed by TRUSHA TUSHAR MOHITE Date: 2022.04.18 15:14:04 +0530 Darkhast also. If the petitioner contends that the fraud has been played by the respondents then the proper procedure is to challenge the said order obtained by fraud before the appropriate forum and not in Writ Petition. Provisions of Order XXIII of the Code of Civil Procedure would come into play. The learned counsel for the petitioner may consider this aspect. Stand over to 07.06.2022. (VINAY JOSHI, J.) (S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6555 OF 2021 Shakerabanu Afsar Patel Thr Her Att Nasir Nuruddin Patel ....PETITIONER V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....RESPONDENT Mr. Shikur Gafur Kudle for Petitioner Mr. N.K.Rajpurohit, AGP for Respondent-State Mr. Prashant R. Suryawanshi i/b Mr. G.M.Savagave, Advocate for R.No.6 & 7 CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRASANNA B. VARALE & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ DATE : 7th June, 2022 P.C. : S. O. to 28/06/2022 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6555 OF 2021 Shakerabanu Afsar Patel Thr Her Att Nasir Nuruddin Patel ....PETITIONER V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R.D. DHANUKA & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. G. SEWLIKAR, JJ DATE : 28th June, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 03/08/2022 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6555 OF 2021 Shakerabanu Afsar Patel Thr Her Att Nasir Nuruddin Patel ....PETITIONER V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R.D. DHANUKA & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. M. SATHAYE, JJ DATE : 13th February, 2023 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 27/03/2023 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION No. 6555 OF 2021 VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Shankerabanu Afsar Patel ….Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ….Respondents Digitally signed by VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Date: 2023.03.10 14:32:26 +0530 Mr. S.K. Kudle, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. N.K. Rajpurohit, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 5 Mr. P.r. Suryawanshi i/by Mr. G.M. Savagave for Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 Mr. Ketan Dhavle i/by Mr. Saurabh Oka, Advocate for Respondent No.8 Mr. T.J. Pandian, Advocate for Respondent No.5 Mr. S.S. Aradhye, Advocate for Respondent No.6 CORAM:- R.D. DHANUKA & GAURI GODSE, JJ. DATE :- 6TH MARCH, 2023. P. C.: The Petitioner has impugned the order passed by this Court in Second Appeal No. 690 of 2014 in this Writ Petition, on the ground that fraud is committed by some of the Respondents in obtaining the order in Second Appeal No. 690/2014. Learned counsel for the Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 raises an issue regarding maintainability of this Writ Petition. Our attention is invited to the order dated 12th April, 2022 passed by the Division Bench of this Court. By the said order, dated 12th April, 2022, this Court has already observed; if the Petitioner contends that the fraud has been played by the Respondents then the proper procedure is to be challenge the said order obtained by fraud before the appropriate forum and not in Writ Petition. Provisions of Order XXIII of the Code of Civil Procedure would come into play. This Court after making these observations, directed the learned counsel for the Petitioner to consider this aspect. Mr. Kudale, learned counsel for the Petitioner states that since the fraud is committed in obtaining the order in Second Appeal, this Court can set aside the order passed in Second Appeal, in Writ Petition. We are afraid, we cannot accept the submission made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner . Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed as not maintainable. No order as to costs. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the correctness of the order passed in Second Appeal for want of jurisdiction. If any appropriate proceedings are filed by the Petitioner, the same shall be decided on its own merits. All contentions of the parties are kept open. (GAURI GODSE, J.) ( R.D.DHANUKA, J. )