Back
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
A.S. Chandurkar, Jitendra Jain, JJ
Mr. Naresh Govind Vaze – Appellant
Versus
The High Court of Bombay – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to procedural rules for appearing in person. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding reasonable restrictions and rights. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's examination of procedural rules' nature. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. final ruling on the notification's validity. (Para 12) |
JUDGMENT : [ Per A.S. Chandurkar, J. ]
1. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the petitioner-in- person as well as the learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The petitioner, a Law Graduate and a former Judicial Officer, has raised a challenge to the Notification dated 9th September 2015 notifying the “Rules for Presentation and Conduct of Proceedings in Person by Parties” (for short, the said Rules) principally on the ground that the said Rules prevent a party-in-person from appearing before the Court and arguing his / her case in person. It has been pleaded in the writ petition that on 21st July 2016, the petitioner had appeared in person in Writ Petition (Stamp) No.19347 of 2016. The Division Bench hearing the said writ petition required the petitioner to appear before the Committee of two Officers of the Registry in accordance with Rule 2 of the said Rules. According to the
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
