Allowed

Shri. Namdeo Punjaji Pangavahane v. Shri. Ranganath Shankar Padol and Ors.

Bombay HC15 Dec 2021IA/3889/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On the application of the petitioner, the High Court of Bombay allowed an interim petition to strike off the name of a deceased respondent. The court ordered the amendment of the petition, renumbering of parties, and re-service of process, while condoning the delay in filing the application.

What did the court decide?

Name of deceased Respondent No. 5 struck off; Application allowed with condonation of delay; Parties renumbered; Amended petition served.

Shri. Namdeo Punjaji Pangavahane Vs Shri. Ranganath… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

6.as.wp.7175.19.doc

¶2

S.S.Kilaje

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3889 OF 2021

¶5

IN

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 7175 OF 2019

¶7

Namdeo Punjabi Panagavhane .. Applicant

¶8

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN :

¶9

Namdeo Punjabi Panagavhane .. Petitioner
Versus
Ranganath Shankar Padol and Ors. .. Respondents

¶10

Ms. Rukmini Khairnar i/by P.N.Joshi for the Applicant / Petitioner

¶11

Mr. Jayesh M. Joshi for Respondent No.1

¶12

 CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
 DATE : 15th DECEMBER, 2021

¶13

P.C. :

¶14

. Heard learned counsels appearing for the parties.

¶15

2. Ms. Khairnar, learned counsel appearing for the Applicant

¶16

submits that the Respondent No.5 i.e. Kum. Smita Narayan Shelke has
expired on 02.10.2018. The Applicant did not have knowledge about

¶17

the same at the time of filing of the Petition. She submits that the

¶18

legal heirs of the deceased Respondent No.5 i.e. Respondent Nos. 2 to

¶19

4 and Respondent No. 6 are already on record as party Respondents to
the Petition.

¶20

3. Ms. Khairnar further submits that the deceased Respondent

¶21

1 of 2

¶22

6.as.wp.7175.19.doc

¶23

No.5 was unmarried and the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 and 6 are the
only legal heirs of the said Respondent. Hence, she prays for striking
out the name of the deceased Respondent No.5 as party Respondent.

¶24

4. For the reasons mentioned in paragraph No.3 of the Interim Application, the Application stands allowed. Delay in filing the Application stands condoned. The name of Respondent No.5 is permitted to be struck of. Respondent No.6 shall be renumbered as Respondent No.5.

¶25

5.Amendment to be carried out forthwith. Re-verification is
dispensed with. Learned Advocate for Respondent No.1 waive service
of the amended Petition. Amended Petition be served on Respondent
Nos. 2 to 5.

¶26

6. Interim Application stands disposed of in the above terms.

¶27

7. Stand over to 21^st December, 2021.

¶28

 [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J.]

¶29

SONALI Digitally signedby SONALI SATISH SATISH KILAJEDate: 2021.12.15 KILAJE 16:08:49 +0530

¶30

2 of 2

Shri. Namdeo Punjaji Pangavahane v. Shri. Ranganath Shankar Padol and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Namdeo Punjaji Pangavahane v. Shri. Ranganath Shankar Padol and Ors.

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

Bapu Rangnath Kale vs Vilas Vitthalrao Deshmukh (Death Lrs.) Suman Vilas Deshmukh

Bapu Rangnath Kale vs Vilas Vitthalrao Deshmukh (Death Lrs.) Suman Vilas Deshmukh

Dhanwantari Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Ltd. Satara vs Assistant Registrar for the Co-Operative Soc., Satara and Ors.

Raymond Limited Vs Macmillan Publishers India Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

Shri. Kadar Asan Mohamed Sultan (Since Decd.) through Lrs. Vs Sou. Mariyum Ahmed Shaikh and Ors.

Bandu Sakharam Randive Decd. Lrsand Ors. Vs Gundo Digambar Buva ,Decd Lrs and Ors.