Bombay High Court
Surendra Gauri Shankar And Anr vs Esque Finmark Pvt. Ltd. And Ors on 23 April, 2021
Author: M.S.Karnik
Bench: Makarand Subhash Karnik
12.wpst 9367.21.doc
Ingale
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION ST. NO. 9367 OF 2021
Office Noees, t Office
Memoranda of Coram, t
appearances, t Coure's Coure's or Judge's orders
orders or direceions and
Regiserar's orders
Mr.Sunny Shah a/w Mr.Viral D. Shukla i/b
M/s.Shukla & Associaees, t for ehe Peeieioners.
Mr.Rashmin Jain i/b Kanga & Co., t for Respondene
No.1.
Dr.Abhinav Chandrachud a/w Mr.Prashane Gawali
i/b Mr.Akshay Pare, t Mr.Niein Waghmare, t
Mr.Yashodhan Gavhankar & Ms.Megha Gupea, t for
Respondene No.2.
Mr.Mayur Khandeparkar, t for Respondene No.4.
Mrs.V.S. Nimbalkar, t AGP for ehe Seaee.
CORAM : M.S.KARNIK, J.
DATE : APRIL 23, 2021
P.C.
. Heard learned Counsel for ehe Peeieioners.
2. Learned Counsel for ehe Peeieioners urged ehae ehe Peeieioners be proeeceed pending admission by graneing ineerim relief as prayed for. His requese is opposed by learned Counsel for ehe Respondenes. A preliminary objeceion is also raised ehae againse ehe impugned order, t ehere is 1 Of 2 ::: Uploaded on - 23/04/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 08/09/2021 08:55:19 :::
12.wpst 9367.21.doc remedy of fling Appeal under Seceion 58 of ehe Real Eseaee (Regulaeion and Developmene) Ace, t 2016 According eo learned Counsel for ehe Peeieioners, t fndings of ehe Appellaee Auehoriey are perverse and he prays ehae Respondenes be direceed eo keep one fae vacane oeherwise greae prejudice would be caused eo ehe Peeieioners. Having gone ehrough ehe order of ehe Appellaee Auehoriey, t ae ehis seage, t I am noe inclined eo grane any ineerim relief.
3. Lise ehe Peeieion for admission on 10/06/2021.
(M.S.KARNIK, J.) 2 Of 2 ::: Uploaded on - 23/04/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 08/09/2021 08:55:19 :::