Allowed

The State of Maharashtra v. Madhav Bhagwant Shringarpure (Decd.)by Lrs.

Bombay HC19 Aug 2006CAF/1361/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a civil application to recall an order dismissing First Appeals as abated. The abatement resulted from the appellants' failure to substitute legal heirs after the death of the original respondent, despite prior directions.

What did the court decide?

Civil Application allowed; order of 26.6.2002 recalling the abatement of First Appeals recalled and disposed off accordingly.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Madhav Bhagwant… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2006)

¶1

:1:

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FIRST APPEAL NO. 942 OF 1988

¶3

WITH

¶4

 FIRST APPEAL NO. 432 OF 1990

¶5

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Office Notes, Office Memoranda
 of Coram, appearances, Court’s
 Orders or directions and
 Registrar’s Orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 S.N. Gawade for the plaintiffs.
 S.M. Kamble, for the respondents.
CORAM: S.B. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : AUGUST 19, 2006.
P.C. :
 1. Learned counsel
 appearing for respondent submits
 that Vakalatnama is filed on behalf
 of Respondent nos.1 to 3. Office
 report shows that Bhatta is not paid.
 Learned advocate is appearing for
 respondent nos.1 to 3. Now Bhatta is
 not necessary.

¶6

 (JUDGE)

¶7

:2:

¶8

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1361 OF 2006

¶9

IN

¶10

 FIRST APPEAL NO. 942 OF 1988

¶11

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Office Notes, Office Memoranda
 of Coram, appearances, Court’s
 Orders or directions and
 Registrar’s Orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 S.N. Gawade, AGP for the appellants.
 S.M. Kamble, for the respondents.

¶12

CORAM: S.B. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : AUGUST 19, 2006.

¶13

P.C. :
 1. Heard learned AGP and learned
 counsel appearing for Respondent
 nos.1 to 3, being legal heirs of
 Original Respondent Madhav Bhagwant
 Shringarpure.

¶14

:3:

¶15

 2. Perused the order passed by

¶16

 this court on June 26, 2002 in First

¶17

 Appeal No. 942 of 1988 with First

¶18

 Appeal No. 432 of 1990. It so

¶19

 happened, that, these two First

¶20

 Appeals, were on the cause list of

¶21

 this court on June 26, 2002. In the

¶22

 morning session matters were called

¶23

 out and were kept back, to be heard

¶24

 at 2.45 p.m. At 2.45 p.m., learned

¶25

 counsel Mr. Ghaisas, who was

¶26

 appearing on behalf of Respondent

¶27

 informed the court, that sole

¶28

 respondent, Madhav Shringarpure, in

¶29

 both the appeals i.e. F.A. No. 942

¶30

 of 1988 and 432 of 1990, died long

¶31

 time back and no steps have been

¶32

:4:

¶33

 taken for substitution of legal
 heirs. This court, noted the fact
 that earlier also these two appeals
 were adjourned for taking steps, by
 the appellants, however, no steps
 were taken and therefore disposed off
 these appeals as abated.

¶34

 3. By this Civil Application the
 applicant is seeking recalling of the
 order passed in F.A. NO. 942 of
 1988 passed on June 26, 2002.
 Learned counsel appearing for the
 respondent, is present and heard in
 relation to this Civil Application.

¶35

 4. Having considered the
 submissions of the learned counsel

¶36

:5:

¶37

 and explanation tendered in paragraph
 4 of the Civil Application, in my
 view, case for recalling of the order
 of dismissal passed by this court on
 26.6.2002 in F.A. NO. 942 of 1988

¶38

 is established.

¶39

 5. In the result, Civil
 Application is allowed in terms of
 prayer clause 4(a) and (b) and

¶40

 disposed off accordingly.

¶41

 (JUDGE)

¶42

:6:

¶43

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FIRST APPEAL NO. 942 OF 1988

¶44

WITH

¶45

 FIRST APPEAL NO. 432 OF 1990

¶46

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Office Notes, Office Memoranda
 of Coram, appearances, Court’s
 Orders or directions and
 Registrar’s Orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 S.N. Gawade for the plaintiffs.
 S.M. Kamble, for the respondents.
CORAM: S.B. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : AUGUST 19, 2006.
P.C. :

¶47

 1. Heard learned counsel
 appearing for the parties.

¶48

 2. At the request of the

¶49

:7:

¶50

 learned counsel appearing for the
 Respondent, Registry is directed to
 list this appeal on final hearing
 board at its appropriate position.

¶51

 (JUDGE)

The State of Maharashtra v. Madhav Bhagwant Shringarpure (Decd.)by Lrs.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Maharashtra v. Madhav Bhagwant Shringarpure (Decd.)by Lrs.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh Mahadeo Thakur Vs the Employees State Insurance Corp. and Ors.

Smt.Meena Sunil Joshi Vs Shree Ganesh Rugna Seva Mitra Mandal and Ors.

Smt.Meena Sunil Joshi Vs Shree Ganesh Rugna Seva Mitra Mandal and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. Vs Vithoba Bala More and Anr.

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. Vs Vithoba Bhimaji Naikodi D/H Baban Vithoba Naikodi and Anr.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Maruti Sakharam Memane and Ors.