Bombay High Court
NANDKUMAR INFRASTRUCTURE LLPversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
- Disposal
- Allowed To be withdrawn
Holding
The High Court allowed the withdrawal of the writ petition with liberty to file a civil suit, without adjudicating the merits.
Summary
Nandkumar Infrastructure LLP filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging actions of the State of Maharashtra and others. The petitioner, through counsel, sought to withdraw the writ petition and requested liberty to institute a civil suit for appropriate reliefs. The Court considered the procedural request and, without examining the substantive merits of the case, permitted the withdrawal of the petition. It expressly clarified that no merits were decided and that all substantive contentions remain open for future litigation. Consequently, the petitioner may now pursue a civil suit on the same cause of action.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition may be withdrawn with liberty to file a civil suit for the same reliefs
- Whether the High Court can allow such withdrawal without deciding the merits of the petition
Subjects
- withdrawal of writ petition
- civil suit
- procedural law
- high court
- liberty to file suit
Judgment
42-11044-2025-CWP=.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 11044 OF 2025
Digitally
Nandkumar Infrastructure LLP … Petitioner
signed by
UDAY
UDAY
SHIVAJI
Versus
SHIVAJI JAGTAP
JAGTAP Date:
2026.03.04
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. … Respondents
19:22:22
+0530
………….
Mr. Suryajeet P. Chavan for the Petitioner.
Mr. Tanaji Mhatugade for Respondent No.4.
Mr. V.M. Mali, AGP for the Respondent - State.
………….
CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR &
PRAVIN S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 4th MARCH, 2026.
P. C. :
1. Mr. Suryajeet Chavan, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner,
on instructions of the Petitioner, seeks withdrawal of the Writ Petition
with liberty to file a Civil Suit for appropriate reliefs.
2. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed to be withdrawn with
liberty as sought.
3. It is clarified that this Court has not considered the matter on
merits and all contentions on merits are expressly kept open.
[PRAVIN S. PATIL, J. ] [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
Uday S. Jagtap 1 of 1
Checking your session…