SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1985 Supreme(Bom) 267

S.M.DAUD, K.MADHAVA REDDY
Gerald Joseph Saldanha & others – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra & others AND Bombay Municipal Corporation & others – Respondent


JUDGMENT - A.G. MADHAVA REDDY, C.J.:---This review petition is by the appellants in Appeal Nos. 81 of 1979 and 82 of 1979, disposed of on 1st August, 1984 by a Division Bench of which one of us (Chief Justice) was a party. That was a judgment common to two appeals. The other Review Petition No. 7 of 1985 was filed on the limited ground. It was contended therein that the assumption made in the judgment under review that Shri Kalsekar continued to be an Advocate on record, was not correct and a request was made to expunge certain observations in that judgment. That review petition was dismissed by us on 23rd September, 1985. Although the present review petition describes all the appellants as review petitioners, it is stated by Shri Kalsekar, learned Counsel appearing for petitioners that it is filed only on behalf of petitioners Nos. 9, 10, 11, 15, 18 and 23 and that Vakalatnama was filed in this review petition only on their behalf and that all the appellants were shown as petitioners in this review petition only because Rule 871 of the High Court Original Side Rules requires it. In our opinion, that Rule does not require all the appellants whose appeal has been dismissed should n





























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top