Bombay High Court
Mukta Arts Ltd vs Abdul Hamid Patel And Ors on 27 February, 2023
Author: Sandeep V. Marne
Bench: S. V. Gangapurwala, Sandeep V. Marne
23 & 80-OSRPW(L)-40-2012 & CAI-107 & 104-2014
Pdp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
REVIEW PETITION (L) NO. 40 OF 2012
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 1826 OF 2003
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 212 OF 2012
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 210 OF 2014
Mukta Arts Ltd. .. Petitioner
Versus
Abdul Hamid Patel & Ors. .. Respondents
ALONG WITH
APPELLATE SIDE
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 219 OF 2009
Mukta Arts Ltd. .. Petitioner
Versus
Mr. Rajendra Laxman Sontakke
& Ors. .. Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 107 OF 2014
IN
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 219 OF 2009
M/s. Whistling Woods
International Ltd. .. Applicant
Versus
Mr. Rajendra Laxman Sontakke
& Ors. .. Respondents
ALONG WITH
ORIGINAL SIDE
WRIT PETITION NO. 1826 OF 2003
Mr. Abdul Hamid Patel & Anr. .. Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
& Ors. .. Respondents
1
23 & 80-OSRPW(L)-40-2012 & CAI-107 & 104-2014
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 104 OF 2014
IN
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 219 OF 2009
Sudhir Sherigar & Ors. .. Applicants
In the matter between:
Mr. Rajendra Laxman Sontakke
& Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
& Ors. .. Respondents
Mr. Aspi Chinoy, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. S. C. Naidu and Mr.
Kamlesh Kharade i/by India Law Alliance for applicant/review
petitioner.
Mr. A. A. Kumbhakoni, Senior Advocate i/by Mr. N. R. Bubna
for respondent no.6-MFSCDC.
Mr. Abhay L. Patki, Addl. Govt. Pleader for respondent
no.12/State.
Mr. Sailesh Naidu & Kamlesh Kharade i/by M/s. India Law
Alliance for applicants in CAI/107/2014 and CAI/104/2014.
Mr. Sailesh Naidu & Kamlesh Kharade for org. respondent no.8
in PIL/219/2009 & for respondent no.9 in WP/1826/2003 -
Mukta Arts Ltd.
Mrs. R. A. Salunkhe, AGP for State in CAI/107 & 104/2014.
Mr. N. R. Bubna for Org. respondent no.2 (Mr. C. S. Sangitrao)
in both the CAIs.
Ms. Jigal Gogri i/by M/s. Negandhi Shah & Himayattulah for
respondent nos.6, 10 & 14 in PIL/219/2009.
CORAM: S. V. GANGAPURWALA, ACTING CJ. &
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 2023 2 23 & 80-OSRPW(L)-40-2012 & CAI-107 & 104-2014 P.C.:
1. On 30th July, 2014, this Court had passed a detailed order. The objection was raised by the State regarding maintainability of the Review Petition after dismissal of the SLP. The Court observed that it would be appropriate if the Review Petition is admitted subject to the preliminary objection about maintainability for which decision of Larger Bench of the Supreme Court is awaited.
2. Mr. Chinoy, learned senior advocate points out the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Apex Court in the case of Khoday Distilleries Ltd. & Ors. vs. Sri. Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd., reported in 2019 (2) Bom. C.R. 734 to contend that even if the SLP is dismissed in limine, Review Petition is maintainable.
3. None appears for the original writ petitioners/petitioners in PIL.
4. Issue notice to the respondents 1 and 2 i.e., original petitioners in Writ Petition No. 1826 of 2003 and respondents 1 to 5 i.e. original petitioners in PIL No.219 of 2009, returnable on 18th April, 2023. Hamdast allowed.
CIVIL APPLICATION NOS.107 & 104 OF 2014:
Issue notice to respondents 1 to 5/original petitioners in PIL No. 219 of 2009, returnable on 18th April, 2023. Hamdast allowed.
(SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.) (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)
Digitally
signed by
PRAVIN
PRAVIN DASHARATH
DASHARATH PANDIT
PANDIT Date:
2023.03.01
16:23:06
+0530
3