Case Note & Summary
The Bombay High Court was hearing two writ petitions filed by the legal representatives of Late Mahadu Nana Bhoir against the Deputy Resettlement Officer, Raigad and others. During the proceedings, the Assistant Government Pleader (AGP) for the respondent State submitted that they had already filed an Affidavit-in-Reply in the Registry, but it was not on record. Consequently, the Court directed the office to locate the said affidavit and place it on record. The matter was then adjourned to 29 June 2018 for further hearing. No other substantive issues were addressed in this brief order.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Adjournment - Registry Directions - Affidavit-in-Reply - The Court directed the office to locate and place on record the Affidavit-in-Reply already filed by the respondent State, as it was not on record, and adjourned the matter to 29.06.2018. (Paras 1-2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the matter should be adjourned to enable the Registry to locate and place on record the Affidavit-in-Reply filed by the respondent State.
Final Decision
The Court directed the office to locate the Affidavit-in-Reply filed by the respondent State and place it on record. The matter was adjourned to 29 June 2018.
Law Points
- Adjournment
- Registry directions
- Affidavit-in-Reply placement
Case Details
2018 LawText (BOM) (06) 49
Writ Petition No.5134/2018 with Writ Petition No.5135/2018
K.K. Tated, B. P. Colabawalla
Mrs. K. R. Kulkarni (AGP for Respondent State)
Late Mahadu Nana Bhoir (Since Deceased) Through Lrs.
Dy. Resettlement Officer, Raigad & Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging some order of the Deputy Resettlement Officer, Raigad.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners seek relief against the Deputy Resettlement Officer, Raigad and others.
Filing Reason
Not mentioned in the order.
Issues
Whether the matter should be adjourned to enable the Registry to locate and place on record the Affidavit-in-Reply filed by the respondent State.
Submissions/Arguments
The AGP submitted that the respondent State had already filed an Affidavit-in-Reply in the Registry, but it was not on record.
Ratio Decidendi
When a party has filed an affidavit but it is not on record, the court may direct the registry to locate and place it on record before proceeding further.
Judgment Excerpts
The learned AGP submits that they have already filed their Affidavit-in-Reply in the Registry, which is not on record.
Hence, office is directed to find out the same and place it on record. S.O. to 29.06.2018.
Procedural History
The writ petitions were listed before the Court on 22 June 2018. The AGP informed that an Affidavit-in-Reply had been filed but was not on record. The Court directed the Registry to locate and place it on record, and adjourned the matter to 29 June 2018.
