Bombay High Court
WP/1543/1988 of S.M. BAFNA and ORS. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA and ORS. on 11 February 1992
THE THE THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONNOTICE OF MOTION NO.166 OF 2004INWRIT PETITION NO.1543 OF 1988Sumermal M. Bafna and ors. ...Petitionersv/sState of Maharashtra and ors. ...RespondentsandAspi R. Sattha...Applicant Mr A.Y. Sakhare i/b Mr V.V. Khemka for Applicant insupport.
Mr V.B. Naik with Mr Vivek Kantawala i/b M/s Kantawala and Co. for Petitioners to show cause.
CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH AND A.A. SAYED JJ.DATE : 20TH JANUARY 2009
P.C. :-
disposing off the writ petition, she was alive.Therefore, it is clear from the record that when thecourt disposed off the petition in favour of thepetitioners without the petitioners serving therespondents who were added as respondents pursuant tothe Court’s order. It is clear that the order of theCourt disposing off the petition was made in violationof principles of natural justice in all probabilitybecause the petitioners did not point out to the Courtthat despite the Court’s order, the petitioners did notserve the petition on the newly added respondents. Inour opinion, once it is brought to the notice of theCourt that it has made an order in breach of theprinciples of natural justice, it becomes the duty ofthe Court to recall that order so that all the parties involved get an opportunity of being heard in the matter.
2. In our opinion, as now it is clear from therecord that the Court disposed off the petition infavour of the petitioners without all the respondentsbeing served, it was the duty of the petitioners whowere seeking orders in their favour to point out to theCourt that the respondents who were ordered to be joinedas respondents by the Court were not served with thepetition. It is clear from the record that thepetitioners firstly did not join parties who were as and by way of cost of this notice of motion Rs.10,000/-.
.Parties to act on the copy of this order duly authenticated by the Associate / Private Secretary ofthe Court.
.
Certified copy is expedited.
( D.K. DESHMUKH J.)
( A.A. SAYED J.)