Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Ulka Seafoods Pvt Ltd Throu. Director ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Throu. Govt ... on 3 November, 2025

Author: Revati Mohite Dere

Bench: Revati Mohite Dere

2025:BHC-AS:47162-DB

              Digitally
              signed by                                                            47-WP-9844-2025.doc
              RUPALI
  RUPALI      RAJESH
  RAJESH      WAKODIKAR
  WAKODIKAR   Date:
              2025.11.07
              11:07:52
              +0530          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                             CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                            WRIT PETITION NO. 9844 OF 2025


                     Ulka Seafoods Pvt.Ltd. Throu.
                     Director Raju Gorakh Rohakale                         ...Petitioner
                          Versus
                     The State of Maharashtra Throu.
                     Govt.Pleader & Ors.                                   ...Respondents


                     Mr. Onkar Shinde for the Petitioner.

                     Mrs. Tanu N. Bhatia, A.G.P for the Respondent-State.

                     Mr. Akshay P. Shinde for the Respondent Nos.7 and 8.

                     Ms. Shraddha Dubepatil i/b Jay & Co. for the Respondent No.5 -
                     MIDC.

                                                      CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &
                                                              SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 3rd NOVEMBER, 2025 P.C. :

1. Learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the petition since during the pendency of the petition, petitioner has paid the property tax as sought for by the concerned department.
Wakodikar 1/2 ::: Uploaded on - 07/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 07/11/2025 22:55:49 :::

47-WP-9844-2025.doc

2. Petition is accordingly disposed of as withdrawn.

3. We make it clear, that we have not gone into the merits of the petition and as such, all contentions of all parties are kept open.

SANDESH D. PATIL, J. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Wakodikar 2/2 ::: Uploaded on - 07/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 07/11/2025 22:55:49 :::