Partly allowed

Laxmandas S/O Arjundas Jakhwani and Others v. Sumitradevi W/O Damodhar Agrawal (Zhunzhunwala) and Others

Bombay HC26 Sept 2017CAF/3789/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court issued notices and disposed of multiple civil appeal forms. It allowed an application to condone delay for bringing legal heirs on record, set aside abatement of the appeal against a specific respondent, and permitted the deletion of an appellant's name from the array, each at the risk of the appellants.

What did the court decide?

Delay condoned; abatement set aside; appellant no.3 deleted from array; amendment directed within two weeks.

Laxmandas S/O Arjundas Jakhwani and Others Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

1/2

¶2

2609 FA 81-2001

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

¶4

C.A.F. No. 3787/2017 IN FIRST APPEAL No. 81/2001

¶5

(LAXMANDAS ARJUNDAS LAKHWANI AND OTHERS -vs- SUMITRADEVI DAMODHAR AGRAWAL (ZHUNZHUNWALA AND OTHERS)

¶6

Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶7

Court's or Judge's Orders.

¶8

Shri M.R. Joharapurkar, counsel for appellants. Shri S.S. Sharma, counsel for respondent nos.1 and 2.

¶9

CORAM: S.B. SHUKRE, J.

¶10

DATE : SEPTEMBER 26, 2017.

¶11

Issue notice to respondent nos.1, 2 and 4, returnable in three weeks.

¶12

C.A.F. No. 3788/2017.

¶13

Issue notice to respondent nos.1, 2 and 4, returnable in three weeks.

¶14

C.A.F. No. 3789/2017.

¶15

Heard.

¶16

For the reasons stated in the application, application is allowed and the name of appellant no.3 is permitted to be deleted from the array of appellants, at the risk of the appellants.

¶17

Application is disposed of.

¶18

C.A.F. No. 8659/2004.

¶19

Heard learned counsel for the appellants.

¶20

2/2

¶21

2609 FA 81-2001

¶22

None appears for the proposed legal heirs of respondent no.3, though duly served.

¶23

For the reasons stated in the application, application is allowed. Abatement of the appeal against respondent no.3 is set aside.

¶24

Application is disposed of.

¶25

C.A.F. No. 8658/2004.

¶26

Heard learned counsel for the appellants.

¶27

None appears for the proposed legal heirs of respondent no.3, though duly served.

¶28

For the reasons stated in the application, delay occurred in filing an application to bring on record, legal heirs of respondent no.3, is condoned. Application is disposed of.

¶29

C.A.F. No. 2377/2005.

¶30

Heard learned counsel for the appellants.

¶31

None appears for the proposed legal heirs of respondent no.3, though duly served.

¶32

For the reasons stated in the application, application is allowed. The proposed legal heirs of respondent no.3 be brought on record.

¶33

Necessary amendment be carried out within two weeks.

¶34

Application is disposed of.

¶35

JUDGE

¶36

Yenurkar

Laxmandas S/O Arjundas Jakhwani and Others v. Sumitradevi W/O Damodhar Agrawal (Zhunzhunwala) and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxmandas S/O Arjundas Jakhwani and Others v. Sumitradevi W/O Damodhar Agrawal (Zhunzhunwala) and Others

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

Shri. Deoman S/O Gulabrao Mahalle Vs Vaibhavanand Gruha Nirman Sahakari Sanstha Thr. President Raju T. Pachore and Others

Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Pusad, Yavatmal Vs Panjab Damodhar Gawande and Others

V.I.D.C. Thr. Exe. Engineer Vs Nirmala W/O Babarao Kuradkar and 4 Ors.

Smt. Mina W/O Sandip Roy Vs Sandip S/O Chittranjan Roy

Executive Engineer, Lower Pus Project, Yavatmal and Another Vs Gopal Omkarmal Mor and Others

Executive Engineer, Bembla Project Division, Yavatmal Vs Sudhakar Mahadeo Singane and 2 Others