Bombay High Court Adjourns LPA in Commercial Dispute Due to Counsel's Request. No legal issues decided; matter adjourned to next date.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 68
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

This is a brief order from the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, in Letters Patent Appeal No.463 of 2009 arising out of Writ Petition No.3952 of 2009(D). The appellant, M/s Rajendra Paper Mart and Others, filed the appeal against Prakashchand S/o Tarchand Parekh and Another. On the date of hearing, the appellant's counsel, Shri Nitin Lalwani, requested an adjournment. The court, without any objection from the respondent's counsel, Shri A. Shelat, granted the adjournment and scheduled the next hearing for 21st January 2010. The order does not discuss any legal issues or merits of the case.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Adjournment - Discretion of Court - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order XVII - The court adjourned the hearing of the Letters Patent Appeal at the request of the appellant's counsel, without any opposition from the respondent. (Para 1)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appeal should be adjourned as requested by the appellant's counsel.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court adjourned the matter to 21-1-2010 at the request of the appellant's counsel.

Law Points

  • Adjournment
  • Court discretion
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2010 LawText (BOM) (01) 227

L.P.A. NO.463 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.3952 OF 2009(D)

2010-01-14

A.H. Joshi, R. K. Deshpande

Shri Nitin Lalwani for appellant, Shri A. Shelat for respondents

M/S Rajendra Paper Mart and Others

Prakashchand S/o Tarchand Parekh and Another

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Letters Patent Appeal arising from a Writ Petition

Remedy Sought

Adjournment of hearing

Filing Reason

Appellant's counsel requested adjournment

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant's counsel requested adjournment.

Ratio Decidendi

Not applicable as no legal issue was decided.

Judgment Excerpts

At the request of learned Advocate Shri Nitin Lalwani, for the appellant, adjourned to 21-1-2010.

Procedural History

The matter was listed for hearing on 14-1-2010, and upon request of appellant's counsel, adjourned to 21-1-2010.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Gujarat Quashes GST Refund Rejection Order for Violation of Statutory Adjournment Rights. Ex-parte Order Set Aside as Authorities Ignored Petitioner's Timely Adjournment Request Under Section 75(5) of Central/Gujarat Goods and Services ...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appeal of CSIR Employee for Non-Communication of ACRs - Failure to Communicate Annual Confidential Reports Violates Principles of Natural Justice and Transparency.