Back
MADHAV J. JAMDAR
Radheshyam Jangad – Appellant
Versus
Shanti Pralhad Sakla W/o Late Pralhad Narayan Sakla – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
1. In Writ Petition No. 4002 of 2023 the challenge is to the legality and validity of order dated 1st August 2022 passed by the learned Judge, Small Causes Court at Mumbai (Bandra Branch) below Exhibit-33 in R.A.E. & R. Suit No. 374/528 of 2011. The said application was filed by Plaintiffs i.e. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 seeking leave for production of additional documents under Order XIII Rule 1, 4 and 7 and Order XVI Rule 6 and 7 of C.P.C. By impugned order, the learned Trial Court allowed the said application. Thus, production of documents were allowed and the said suit was adjourned for hearing on admissibility of documents. The order impugned in other Writ Petitions is also similar.
2. These Writ Petitions were heard in the morning session on 30th March 2023 and were rejected. As by the impugned order, merely production of documents were allowed and matter was kept for hearing on admissibility of documents it is observed in order dated 30th March 2023 that there is no prejudice caused to the Petitioners and therefore, interference under Article 227
Court must determine the genuineness of AGM minutes amid allegations of perjury while considering the implications of a Supreme Court stay order on parallel inquiries.
Filing a false affidavit is a serious offense and can lead to legal consequences under the Indian Penal Code and the Contempt of Courts Act.
when the contemnor deliberately and willfully violated the order of the Court, he is liable for consequences under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, but the Court cannot be hyper sensitive in....
The court established that fabricating court orders constitutes criminal contempt, interfering with justice and warranting severe penalties under the Contempt of Courts Act.
Judicial officers should not be impleaded in writ petitions, and applications under Order XI must be timely and relevant to the case.
Section 415 of IPC mandates that there should be inducement from hands of accused to victim to part with any property and transaction should be tainted with dishonest intention right from its outset.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
