Rohan Ramdas Satone v. Union Of India
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ELECTION PETITION NO.15 OF 2025 Rohan Ramdas Satone
...Petitioner
V/s.
Union of India
...Respondent
Mr. Ranjit Agashe with Mr. Aditya Sharma for the Petitioner. Mr. Amit A. Karande for the Respondent No. 6. Mr. Vinod Sangvikar, Advocate present in the Court. Mr. Rohan Ramdas Satone is present in person.
CORAM
:
ABHAY AHUJA, J.
DATE :
5th MAY 2025 P.C. :
1.
Pursuant to the order dated 28th April, 2025, today the matter has been listed under the caption "For Dismissal". 2.
When the matter is called out, Mr. Sangvikar, learned Advocate whose visiting card had been tendered to the Court Associate, is present and tenders an apology to this Court, submitting that he had only given a visiting card to someone who had sought his phone number and had never instructed him to submit to the Court that he would appear in the matter. Mr. Sangvikar submits that he does not Digitally signed by NIKITA YOGESH GADGIL Date:
2025.05.05 20:25:27 +0530 even know the person. Mr. Sangvikar accordingly submits that his name NIKITA YOGESH GADGIL be cleared from any controversy in the matter. 1/3
3.
Mr. Sangivikar's explanation is accepted.
4.
Mr. Agashe, learned Counsel appears in the matter instructed by Mr. Aditya Sharma, who is on record on behalf of the Petitioner and tenders an unconditional apology to this Court submitting that on 2nd April, 2025 itself it was communicated to the Petitioner that Mr. Aditya Sharma would not appear in the matter and on 22nd April, 2025 the papers had been returned to the Petitioner.
5.
An affidavit dated 5th May, 2025 signed by Advocate Mr. Aditya Sharma apologizing to the Court for remaining absent on 28th April, 2025 and undertaking that steps for discharge in the matter will be taken at the earliest is tendered. Registry to accept the same. 6.
The Petitioner also appears in person today and seeks two weeks' time to appoint another advocate in place of Mr. Aditya Sharma. 7.
Let vakalatnama of the new Advocate positively be filed within a period of two weeks.
2/3
8.
Mr. Karande, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.6 submits that in view of the Section 99 and Section 119 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, this Court impose costs on the Petitioner as the returned candidate viz. the Respondent No. 6 is entitled to costs incurred by him in contesting the Petition. Mr. Karande tenders across the bar a decision of this Court (Goa Bench) in the case of Somnatha Zuvarkar Vs. Atanasio Monseratte1 in support of his contentions.
9.
Since this Court has granted two weeks' time to the Petitioner for filing vakalatnama of the new Advocate, list this matter on re-opening on 9th June, 2025 First on Board.
(ABHAY AHUJA, J.) 2011(1) ABR (NOC) 47(BOM.) (GOA BENCH).
3/3