Bookmark
PDF
Share
CaseIQ

Ashwatha Developers v. Shree Vardhaman Stanakvasi Jain Shravak Sangh

Bombay High Court

Feb 10, 2016

Judgment

Subsequent
References

CaseIQ

Case Information

CITATION CODES

citation codes

CASE NO.

Appeal From Order No. 495 of 2015, Along With, Appeal From Order No. 496 of 2015, Along With, Appeal From Order No. 1210 of 2015, Civil Application No. 1538 of 2015, Appeal From Order No. 1210 of 2015, Along With, Appeal From Order No. 487 of 2015, Civil Application No. 627 of 2015, Appeal From Order No. 487 of 2015, Appeal From Order No. 495 of 2015; Appeal From Order No. 496 of 2015; Appeal From Order No. 1210 of 2015; Civil Application No. 1538 of 2015; Appeal From Order No. 1210 of 2015; Appeal From Order No. 487 of 2015; Civil Application No. 627 of 2015; and Appeal From Order No. 487 of 2015

Attorney(S)

Mr. Pravin Samdhani, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Anirudha Joshi, a/w Mr. Satyen Vora, Mr. Atul Kshatriya, i/by Markand Gandhi & Co. for the Appellant in Appeal from Order No. 495 of 2015 and in Appeal from Order No. 496 of 2015 and for Respondent Nos. 4 in Appeal from Order No. 487 of 2015 and Appeal from Order No. 1210 of 2015.

Mr. Shishir Joshi, a/w. Ms. Priti Joshi i/by Mrs. Bhakti Jogal for the Appellant in Appeal from Order No. 487 of 2015 and for Respondent No. 4 in Appeals from Order No. 495 of 2015 and 496 of 2015.

Mr. Mukesh Chheda for the Respondent No. 1 in Appeal from Order No. 496 of 2015, Appeal from Order No. 487 of 2015 and Appeal from Order No. 1210 of 2015.

Mr. A.V Diwate i/by Mr. U.H Deshpande for B.M.C for Appellants in Appeal from Order No. 1210 of 2015 and for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in Appeal from Order No. 495 of 2015 and Appeal from Order No. 496 of 2015.

Mr. Mukesh Chheda i/by Mr. Y.M Chheda for Respondent No. 1 in Appeal from Order No. 495 of 2015.

JUDGES

R.D Dhanuka, J.

ACTS

No Acts

See more information ... Less ...

R.D Dhanuka, J.:— Learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1 in Appeal from Order No. 495 of 2015 tenders written submission dated 10th February 2016. In the written submission filed by the respondent no. 1, there are four annexures. Three documents annexed to the written submission are subsequent to the date of the impugned order passed by the learned trial Judge.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1 submits that all these documents are forming part of the record before the learned trial Judge in the chamber summons and would be relevant for the purpose of deciding these appeals. These documents were not relied upon before the learned trial Judge when the impugned order was passed.

3. Mr. Samdhani, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants in Appeal from Order No. 495 of 2015 strongly raises an objection to these enclosures forming part of the written submission.

4. It is made clear that since these documents which are now sought to be placed on record along with the written submission were not forming part of the proceedings in which the impugned orders are passed, at this stage, I am not inclined to permit the appellants to place these documents on record. All the documents annexed to the written submission are of the period subsequent to the date of the impugned order. The matter was substantially argued at length by the two counsel in this matter on behalf of the respondent no. 1. However, as and by way of giving further opportunity to the respondent no. 1, the matter was placed on board today for further arguments.