Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.33 seconds)

Chhotelal Verma vs The Corporation Of The City Of Nagpur on 3 September, 1963

30. In para. 9 of the petition, the petitioners referred to the decision of Mr. Justice Abhyankar in Civil Revision Application No. 193 of 1960 and other companion revision applications. That decision is : City of Nagpur Corporation v. Bhalchandra . From the observations of Mr. Justice Abhyankar at page. 772 it is clear that the decision, so far as the points involved in this petition are concerned, was based on a concession made at the Bar. The opponents in their return have frankly stated that when the revision applications were heard by Mr. Justice Abhyankar, they could not produce the necessary documents, and the decision should be confined to the cases that were decided. As already pointed out, Mr. Justice Abhyankar's decision proceeds mainly on the concession made at the Bar and it is obvious that the decision must be confined to the cases decided by Mr. Justice Abhyankar. We are also told that the Corporation filed a review application, but it was rejected. Even so, the effect would be that Mr. Justice Abhyankar's decision would conclude the particular cases decided by him. It is not even suggested before us that that decision would operate as a bar on the principles of res judicata.
Bombay High Court Cites 37 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1