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

BOMBAY HIGH COURT - BENCH AT AURANGABAD
JEEVAN VINAYAK JAHAGIRDAR – Appellant
Versus
THE DIRECTOR AND OTHERS – Respondent


Advocates:
['Jadhav Chetan T', 'COPY SERVED ON GP', '', 'R NO IS SERVED', 'Chapalgaonkar S G']

.. 1 ..

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

1107 WRIT PETITION NO.9106 OF 2021

Jeevan Vinayak Jahagirdar

.. Petitioner

Versus

The Director,

Directorate of Marketing and Others

.. Respondents

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Chetan T. Jadhav

AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 : Mr. P.K. Lakhotiya

Advocate for Respondent No.3 : Mr. S.G. Chapalgaonkar

...

CORAM

: S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND

S. G. DIGE, JJ.

DATE

: 16-12-2021

PER COURT :

1.

Heard Mr. Jadhav, learned Advocate for the petitioner and

Mr. Chapalgaonkar, learned Advocate for respondent no.3.

2.

It appears that the interlocutory orders are being litigated

between the parties by filing the writ petition and other proceedings.

Section 8 of the Commercial Courts Act provides that the civil

revision application or the petition shall not be entertained against

interlocutory orders of a Commercial Court including an order on the

issue of the jurisdiction, and any such challenge, subject to the

provisions of Section 13, shall be raised only in an appeal against the

Gajanan

.. 2 ..

decree of the Commercial Court. Section 13 of the Commercial

Courts Act provide

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