REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Indian National Congress Appellant

V/S

STATE OF GOA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

AUSTRALIAN BOOT TRADE EMPLOYEES FEDERATION V. WHYBROW AND CO. [REFERRED TO]
KIHOTO HOLLOHAN V. ZACHILHU ("KIHOTO I") [REFERRED TO]
A K GOPALAN VS. STATE OF MADRAS OPPOSITE PARTY; UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
EXPRESS NEWSPAPER PRIVATE LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
HARINAGAR SUGAR MILLS LIMITED VS. SHYAM SUNDER JHUNJHUNWALA [REFERRED TO]
ASSOCIATED CEMENT COMPANY LIMITED VS. P N SHARMA [REFERRED TO]
HIS HOLINESS KESAVANANDA BHARATI SRIPADAGALVARU SHRI RAGHUNATH RAO GANPAT RAO N H NAWAB MOHAMMAD IFTIKHAR ALI KHAN SHETHIA MINING AND MANUFACTURING CORPORATION LIMITED THE ORIENTAL GOAL GO LIMITED VS. STATE OF KERALA:UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF JUSTICE OF ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. L V A DIXITULU:V V S KRISHNAMURTHY [REFERRED TO]
KIHOTA HOLLOHON VS. ZACHILLHU [REFERRED TO]
KIHOTO HOLLOHAN VS. ZACHILLHU [REFERRED TO]
L CHANDRA KUMAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
REEMA AGGARWAL VS. ANUPAM [REFERRED TO]
RAJA RAM PAL VS. SPEAKER LOK SABHA [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA SINGH RANA VS. SWAMI PRASAD MAURYA [REFERRED TO]
CONSUMER EDUCATION AND RESEARCH SOCIETY VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
KAILASH NATH SINGH YADAV VS. SPEAKER VIDHAN SABHA LUCKNOW [REFERRED TO]
SPEAKER HARYANA VIDHAN SABHA VS. KULDEEP BISHNOI [REFERRED TO]
ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ORS. VS. BAJRANG BAHADUR SINGH AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition was admitted on 20/6/2017. The order issuing Rule sets out in brief the rival submissions. Paragraphs 7 and 8 say that various aspects, including that of jurisdiction, would have to be examined. The order notes that at that time there was no Affidavit in Reply, and specifically says its observations are prima facie and tentative. Yet, there being arguable issues, the Court issued Rule. One of us (Ms. Nutan D. Sardessai J.) was a member of the Bench that admitted the petition.

(2.) The pleadings are now complete. We have had the benefit of hearing Mr. Desai for the Petitioners, Mr. Doctor for Respondent No.6 and Mr. Lawande, the learned Advocate-General for Respondent No.1. The following summary may lend perspective to the more detailed consideration that follows. We will omit the dates for the purposes of this summary, and come back to them later.

(3.) The facts are not many, and they are largely undisputed.

Click here to view full judgment.

INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS Vs. STATE OF GOA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address