ASHISH CHEMBURKAR . vs U.P. COOP. SPINNING MILLS FED. LTD. — C.A. No. 7679/2009
Case under Section III. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010067232004
Filing Date
24-Mar-2004
Registration No
C.A. No. 7679/2009
Diary Number
6723/2004
Order Date
20-Nov-2009
Document Type
ROP - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Disposed Off
Last updated 19-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.ASHISH CHEMBURKAR .
Adv. M. V. KINI & ASSOCIATES
Respondent(s)
-
1.U.P. COOP. SPINNING MILLS FED. LTD.
Adv. B. KRISHNA PRASAD ANUVRAT SHARMA RAKESH UTTAMCHANDRA UPADHYAY
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
20-Nov-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
23-Oct-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
01-May-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
01-Dec-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
25-Jul-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
18-Feb-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Aug-2007
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
23-Apr-2007
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
31-Jan-2007
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
29-Sep-2006
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
25-Sep-2006
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
15-Sep-2006
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
31-Jul-2006
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
30-Jan-2006
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
12-Sep-2005
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
22-Aug-2005
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
25-Jul-2005
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
11-Jul-2005
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
29-Apr-2005
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
28-Feb-2005
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
13-Jan-2005
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
20-Aug-2004
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Mar-2004
Case filed
Registration No. C.A. No. 7679/2009
Summary: Civil Appeal No. 7679/2009 On November 20, 2009, the Supreme Court heard four consolidated appeals arising from the High Court of Bombay's September 4, 2003 order. The High Court had rejected prayer clause (a) of the writ petitions without assigning reasons, while directing Rule on clauses (b) and (c). The Supreme Court found this procedurally flawed, holding that prayer clauses (a) and (b) were interrelated and the High Court should not have rejected clause (a) at the threshold stage. The Court set aside the rejection of prayer clause (a) and remitted the matter to the High Court to hear the writ petitions on merits and consider both prayers. The Court requested expeditious disposal within six months. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts