This document is a cause list from the Bombay High Court dated March 12, 2024 for Court No. 27. It lists 11 cases with details such as case numbers, parties involved, advocates' names, and remarks. Many of the cases are listed under the categories of "For Orders (Unserved Notices)" or "For Orders (Objection Not Removed)" indicating issues related to service of notices or removal of office objections. The remarks provide additional context regarding the status or issues in each case.
This document is a cause list from the Bombay High Court dated March 12, 2024 for Court No. 27. It lists 11 cases with details such as case numbers, parties involved, advocates' names, and remarks. Many of the cases are listed under the categories of "For Orders (Unserved Notices)" or "For Orders (Objection Not Removed)" indicating issues related to service of notices or removal of office objections. The remarks provide additional context regarding the status or issues in each case.
This document is a cause list from the Bombay High Court dated March 12, 2024 for Court No. 27. It lists 11 cases with details such as case numbers, parties involved, advocates' names, and remarks. Many of the cases are listed under the categories of "For Orders (Unserved Notices)" or "For Orders (Objection Not Removed)" indicating issues related to service of notices or removal of office objections. The remarks provide additional context regarding the status or issues in each case.
[Civil] VS Aditi Naikare SMT. JAYASHREEBAI DHONDU CHAVAN (SINCE DECEASED) THR. LRS. ASHOK DHONDU CHAVAN AND ORS. REMARK : NOTE :- ## 1) AS PER COURT'S ORDER DTD. 20/09/2023 NOTICE ISSUED TO THE RESPONDENT NOS. 1 TO 5. ## 2) NOTICE DULY SERVED ON RESPONDENT NOS 2 AND 4 AND UNSERVED ON RESPONDENT NOS 1, 3, 3A, 3B AND 5 WITH BAILIFF REMARKS RESPONDENT NOS 1, 3, 3A, 3B "NOT RESIDING AT PRESENT ADDRESS AND NO ONE KNOWS THEIR PRESENT ADDRESS". AND "DOOR OF RESPONDENT NO 5 FOUND LOCK AFTER ENQUIRY WITH MR. PATIL OCCUPANT IN SAID CHAWL, HE WAS INFORMED THAT THEY DO NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT RESP. NO. 5". HENCE RETURN UNSERVED. ## ADV. FOR THE APPLICANT HAS NOT TAKE STEPS AGAINST UNSERVED RESPONDENT NOS. 1, 3, 3A, 3B & 5 TILL TODAY. ## 1ST TIME.
2 CRA/369/2023 RAJKUMAR D. SARAF N D JAYWANT
[Civil] VS SMT. DAKHIBAI SINGHANIA DHARAMSHALA TRUST, GOPIKUMAR BHAGWANDAS SINGHANIA AND ORS. REMARK : NOTE :- ## 1) AS PER COURT'S ORDER DATED 25/08/2023, NOTICE ISSUED TO THE RESPONDENT NOS. 1 TO 5 ## 2) AS PER BAILIFF REPORT DATED 13/10/2023 NOTICE DULY SERVED ON RESPONDENT NOS. 2 TO 5 AND UNSERVED ON RESPONDENT NO. 1, AS PER REMARK "SAID RESPONDENT NO. 1 EXPIRED IN FEBRUARY 2018." ## 3) ADV. FOR APPLICANT HAS NOT TAKEN STEPS AGAINST UNSERVED / EXPIRED RESPONDENT NO. 1 TILL TODAY. 4) I.A. NO. 13400 OF 2023 (FOR STAY) IS KEPT HEREWITH. ## 3RD TIME.
with
IA/13400/2023 RAJKUMAR D. SARAF N D JAYWANT
[Civil] VS N D JAYWANT
11/03/2024 17:58:59 1/5
OFFICER CAUSELIST CAUSELIST COURT NO 27-FOR TUESDAY THE 12TH MARCH 2024 BOMBAY HIGHCOURT - 2 -
SMT. DAKHIBAI SINGHANIA D
In HARAMSHALA TRUST, GOPIKUM CRA/369/2023 AR BHAGWANDAS SINGHANIA A ND ORS.
[Civil] VS Ashok M Saraogi SUBHASH MAHESH SHARMA REMARK : NOTE :- ## 1) CRA IS UNDER OFFICE OBJECTION. ## 2) AS PER ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER DATED 03/03/2021 CRA (ST.) IS NUMBERED. ## FOLLOWING THE OFFICE OBJECTION:- ## (A) THERE ARE UNDERLINES / MARKINGS ON DOCUMENT PRESENTED AT PAGE NO. 141 & 151. ## ADV. FOR THE APPLICANT HAS NOT REMOVED OFFICE OBJECTION TILL TODAY. ## 1ST TIME.
[Civil] VS PRASHANT SOHANLAL BAJ AND ORS. REMARK : NOTE :- ## 1) CRA IS UNDER OFFICE OBJECTION. ## 2) AS PER ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER DATED 03/03/2021 CRA (ST.) IS NUMBERED. ## FOLLOWING ARE OBJECTIOSN:- ## A) XEROX COPIES ANNEXED ARE NOT LEGIBLE AND SMALL FONT AT PAGE NOS 79 TO 85, 116, 170 TO 172, 191 TO 193, 204 TO 212, 231 TO 236 ## B) THERE ARE UNDERLINE ON DOCUMENT PRESENTED PAGE NO. 35, 36, 46, 49 TO 71 ## C) CAVEAT STATEMENT NOT STATED. ## ADVOCATE FOR APPLICANT HAS NOT REMOVE OFFICE OBJECTIONS TILL TODAY ## 2ND TIME.
5 CRA(ST)/34203/2023 MOIN AKHTAR S/O ABDUL SATTAR Asutosh Shukla
[Civil] VS MOHD. SIDDIQUE HAJI BASHIR AHMED(DECEASED) THR,LRS SAYED AKHTAR QURESHI REMARK : NOTE :- ## 1) CRA (ST.) IS UNDER OFFICE OBJECTIONS. ## FOLLOWING ARE THE OFFICE OBJECTIONS:- ## (A) CHALLENGE IN BRIEF STATEMENT NOT STATED IN SYNOPSIS. ## (B) THE PHOTOCOPIES ANNEXED ARE NOT LEGIBLE AT PAGE NOS. 73, 74, 135 TO 137, 140 TO 142. ## (C) THERE ARE UNDERLINES / MARKINGS ON DOCUMENTS AT PAGE NOS. 66, 67, 143 TO 148. ## ADV. FOR THE APPLICANT HAS NOT REMOVED OFFICE OBJECTIONS TILL TODAY. ## 3RD TIME.
with
IA(ST)/34204/2023 MOIN AKHTAR S/O ABDUL SAT Asutosh Shukla
[Civil] TAR Asutosh Shukla VS MOHD. SIDDIQUE HAJI BASHI R AHMED
[Civil] VS SUSHILA MAHADU SAWANT REMARK : NOTE :- ## 1) CRA (ST.) IS UNDER OFFICE OBJECTIONS. ## FOLLOWING ARE THE OFFICE OBJECTIONS:- ## (A) CRA (ST.) IS FILED BEYOND THE PRESCRIBED PERIOD OF LIMITATION BY 8 DAYS AND CRA (ST.) DOES NOT ACCOMPANY THE DELAY CONDONATION APPLICATION. ## (B) THE PHOTOCOPIES ANNEXED ARE NOT LEGIBLE AT PAGE NOS. 28, 31, 33 TO 44, 117, 118, 180 TO 183. ## ADV. FOR THE APPLICANT HAS NOT REMOVED OFFICE OBJECTIONS TILL TODAY. ## 3RD TIME.
11/03/2024 17:58:59 2/5
OFFICER CAUSELIST CAUSELIST COURT NO 27-FOR TUESDAY THE 12TH MARCH 2024 BOMBAY HIGHCOURT - 3 -
7 CRA(ST)/35088/2023 VISHWAS CHINTAMANI Mandar G Bagkar
[Civil] DESHCHOUGALE (GULAVANI) (SINCE DEC.) BHUSAHN C. DESHCHOUGULE VS HANMANT ANANDRAO YADAV AND ORS. REMARK : NOTE :- ## 1) CRA (ST.) IS UNDER OFFICE OBJECTIONS. ## FOLLOWING ARE THE OFFICE OBJECTIONS:- ## (A) NAMES OF THE RESPONDENT NO. 10 STATED IN THE APPLICATION DO NOT CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME AS GIVEN IN CERTIFIED COPIES ANNEXED. ## (B) BLANK PORTION ARE NOT FILL-UP AT PAGE IN INTERIM APPLICATION DOCKET. ## ADV. FOR THE APPLICANT HAS NOT REMOVED OFFICE OBJECTIONS TILL TODAY. ## 3RD TIME.
with
IA(ST)/35089/2023 SHRI.VISHWAS CHINTAMANI D Mandar G Bagkar
[Civil] ESHCHOUGULE (GULAVANI) TH Mandar G Bagkar R. LRA. VS HANMANT ANANDRAO YADAV AN D ORS.
[Civil] THR. PROPRIETORS, 1.ALI MOH. Balasaheb Deshmukh FAKHRUDDIN BAWAJI 2. KHOZEMA F. BAWAJI VS GANESH KESHAV PALAV REMARK : NOTE :- ## 1) CRA IS UNDER OFFICE OBJECTIONS. ## FOLLOWING ARE THE OFFICE OBJECTIONS:- ## (A) NAME OF THE APPLICANT NO. 2 STATED IN APPLICATION DO NOT CORRESPOND WITH THE NAMES OF GIVEN IN CERTIFIED COPIES ANNEXED. ## (B) PLAINT COPY NOT FILED. ## (C) CAVEAT STATEMENT NOT STATED. ## ADV. FOR THE APPLICANT HAS NOT REMOVED OFFICE OBJECTION TILL TODAY. ## 3RD TIME.
[Civil] VS SUNIL S/O JAYANTILAL SHAH AND ORS. REMARK : NOTE :- ## 1) CRA (ST.) IS UNDER OFFICE OBJECTIONS. ## FOLLOWING ARE THE OFFICE OBJECTIONS:- ## (A) BLANK PORTIONS ARE NOT FILL UP AT PAGE NO. 109, & SUIT NO. ## (B) CHALLENGE IN BRIEF NOT STATED. ## (C) CAVEAT STATEMENT NOT STATED. ## ADV. FOR THE APPLICANT HAS NOT REMOVED OFFICE OBJECTIONS TILL TODAY. ## 3RD TIME.
[Civil] VS TAI MAHENDRA OVHAL REMARK : NOTE :- ## 1) CRA (ST.) IS UNDER FOLLOWING OFFICE OBJECTIONS :- ## (A) BLANK PORTIONS ARE NOT FILL UP AT PAGE NOS. 18 AND I.A. (ST.) PAGE NOS. 6 & 8. ## (B) DELAY DAYS DIFFER IN INTERIM APPLICATION (ST.) ## ADV. FOR THE APPLICANT HAS NOT REMOVED OFFICE OBJECTION TILL TODAY. ## 1ST TIME.
[Civil] VS YASHWANT KONDIBA MULE (DECEASED) REMARK : NOTE :- ## 1) CRA (ST.) IS UNDER FOLLOWING OFFICE OBJECTION :- ## (A) NAME OF THE RESPONDENT STATED IN THE APPLICATION DO NOT CORRESPOND WITH THE NAMES AS GIVEN IN THE CERTIFIED COPIES ANNEXED. ## ADV. FOR THE APPLICANT HAS NOT REMOVED OFFICE OBJECTION TILL TODAY. ## 1ST TIME.
[Civil] VS Patil Kalpesh Uttam YASHWANT KONDIBA MULE (DE CEASED) THR LRS.
12 CRA(ST)/2809/2024 M/S KRUSHNA CONSTRUCTIONS KAUTUBH PAWAR
[Civil] THROUGH MR. SUNIL DATTARAYA PATIL VS SOU. ASHA RAVINDRA GAIKWAD REMARK : NOTE :- ## 1) CRA (ST.) IS UNDER OFFICE OBJECTION. ## FOLLOWING THE OFFICE OBJECTION :- ## (A) CAVEAT STATEMENT NOT STATED. ## ADV. FOR THE APPLICANT HAS NOT REMOVED OFFICE OBJECTION TILL TODAY. ## 1ST TIME
[Civil] VS KAISAR JAMEEL KHAN THR. CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY FIROZ ABDUL WAHAB SHAIKH REMARK : NOTE :- ## 1) CRA (ST.) IS UNDER FOLLOWING OFFICE OBJECTIONS :- ## (A) THERE ARE UNDERLINES / MARKINGS ON DOCUMENTS AT PAGE NOS. 60 TO 72. ## (B) BLANK PORTIONS ARE NOT FILL UP AT PAGE NOS. 54, 73 to 94. ## (C) CAVEAT STATEMENT NOT STATED. ## ADV. FOR THE APPLICANT HAS NOT REMOVED OFFICE OBJECTION TILL TODAY. ## 1ST TIME.
14 CRA(ST)/3393/2024 NARANGS HOTELS (P) LTD. ZAK Najam es sani
[Civil] VS Ahmed Saeed Uraizee SMT. SARLA HIRA ADVANI (DELETED SINCE DEAD) REMARK : NOTE :- ## 1) CRA (ST.) IS UNDER FOLLOWING OFFICE OBJECTIONS:- ## (A) THAT THE CRA (ST.) IS ACCOMPANIED BY A CERTIFIED COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 29/11/2023 AND JUDGMENT DATED 29/02/2020 NOT ACCOMPANIED. ## (B) THE PHOTOCOPIES ANNEXED ARE NOT LEGIBLE AT PAGE NOS. 140, 189, 192 & 197. ## (C) THERE ARE UNDERLINES / MARKINGS ON DOCUMENTS PRESENTED AT PAGE NOS. 67-B TO 67-E. ## (D) BLANK PORTIONS ARE NOT FILL UP AT PAGE NO. 10 IN I.A. (ST). ## ADV. FOR THE APPLICANT HAS NOT REMOVED OFFICE OBJECTION TILL TODAY. ## 1ST TIME.
with
IA(ST)/3394/2024 NARANGS HOTELS (P) LTD. ZAK Najam es sani
[Civil] VS ZAK Najam es sani SMT. SARLA HIRA ADVANI (D MADNESH SINGH
11/03/2024 17:58:59 4/5
OFFICER CAUSELIST CAUSELIST COURT NO 27-FOR TUESDAY THE 12TH MARCH 2024 BOMBAY HIGHCOURT - 5 -
[Civil] VS SHRI. AJAY RAMCHANDRA BHOSALE REMARK : NOTE :- ## 1) CRA (ST.) IS UNDER FOLLOWING OFFICE OBJECTIONS:- ## (A) BLANK PORTIONS ARE NOT FILL UP AT PAGE NO. 21. ## (B) CAVEAT AND SLP STATEMENT NOT STATED. ## ADV. FOR THE APPLICANT HAS NOT REMOVED OFFICE OBJECTION TILL TODAY. ## 1ST TIME.
Is Bad-Faith the New Wilful Blindness?: The Company Directors’ Duty of Good Faith and Wilful Blindness Doctrine Under Common Law Usa (Delaware) and Uk (England): a Comparative Study