ANOOP V.MOHTA
Sharad Pawar – Appellant
Versus
Gopinath Munde – Respondent
1. There is no objection to the Appeals being heard finally by this Court, therefore by consent heard accordingly.
2. Rule returnable forthwith.
3. Both these Appeals are arising out of Order dated 26 November 2013 by the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Greater Bombay. The points/issues raised and argued are common and so also the parties, therefore, this common judgment.
4. The operative part of the order is as under :
“1. The notice of motion no.3745/2013 is partly made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) and defendant no.7 is hereby temporarily restrained from functioning as a president of defendant no.1 till final disposal of the suit.
2. The hearing of suit is expedited and parties are directed to make an endeavor to proceed with the suit so as to finish the same within a period of 3 months from the date of this order, preferably on day to day basis after filing of written statement.
3. Defendants are directed to file their written statement within 15 days from the date of this order and service of writ of summons on them is hereby dispensed with. In the meantime parties shall complete the inspection of documents.
4. Both parties also shall submit to the Court the progra
Ratnagiri Gas and Power Pvt. Ltd v. RDS Projects Ltd and ors.
Addl. Distt. Magistrate, Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla
Union of India thr.Govt. Of Pandicherry Anr. v. V. Ramakrishnan and ors.
Kalabharati Advertising v. Hemant Vimalnath Narichania and ors.
Ravi Yashwant Bhoir Vs. Chief Minister & Ors.(2012) 4 SCC 438
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.