Disposed

Harishchandra Gangaram Pedamakr Since Decd. Thr Lrs v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC3 Mar 2023WP/2469/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court observed an interim order directing the Trial Court to proceed on merits in a Civil Suit despite the pendency of an appeal. It issued a mandatory direction for the Trial Court to decide the suit within six months, while clarifying that private respondents shall not be granted unnecessary adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Directed the learned Trial Judge to hear and decide the S.C. Suit No.2872 of 2006 within six months and to grant no unnecessary adjournments to private respondents.

Harishchandra Gangaram Pedamakr Since Decd… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

26.wp.2469.23.doc

¶2

Ajay

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 2469 OF 2023

¶6

Harishchandra Gangaram Pedamkar

¶7

(Since deceased deleted)
Asmita Anil Dalvi Nee
Asmita Harischandra Pedamkar and Ors...Petitioners
Versus
State of Maharashtra and Ors ..Respondents

¶8

Mr. Rajesh Jain a/w. Mr. Rohit Jain and Neha Doshi i/by Legal Juris for Petitioners.

¶9

Mr. C.D. Mali, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 – State.

¶10

CORAM :MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE :MARCH 03, 2023.

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

1. Heard Mr. Jain, learned Advocate for the Petitioners and Mr.

¶13

Mali, learned AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 – State.

¶14

2. The limited prayer prayed for by the Petitioners in the

¶15

present Writ Petition is for seeking expeditious hearing of the S.C. Suit
No.2872 of 2006 pending on the record and file of the learned City
Civil Court at Bombay, Dindoshi Branch, Mumbai.

¶16

3. Mr. Jain has referred to and relied upon the order dated 13.02.2023 passed in Interim Application No.3240 of 2022 in First Appeal No.1085 of 2010 whereby this Court has clearly opined that the pendency of the First Appeal in another parallel proceeding shall

¶17

1 of 2

¶18

26.wp.2469.23.doc

¶19

not preclude the Trial Court from proceeding on merits in Suit
No.2872 of 2006.

¶20

4. Mr. Jain would submit that before the learned Trial Court the private Respondents have protracted the hearing of the proceedings on the aforementioned ground. Hence, Petitioners were constrained to file the present Writ Petition on 28.12.2022 i.e. before the passing of the order dated 13.02.2023.

¶21

5. In view of the above, the learned Trial Judge, City Civil Court at Bombay, Dindoshi Branch is directed to hear and decide the S.C. Suit No.2872 of 2006 within a period of 6 months from today.

¶22

6. It is clarified that the learned Judge shall not grant unnecessary adjournment to the parties and more specifically to the private Respondents in the present Writ Petition and the Suit shall be disposed of on its own merits strictly in accordance with law.

¶23

7. With the above directions, Writ Petition is disposed.

¶24

 [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

¶25

Digitally signed by AJAY AJAY TRAMBAK TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE UGALMUGALE Date: 2023.03.04 10:30:53 +0530

¶26

2 of 2

Harishchandra Gangaram Pedamakr Since Decd. Thr Lrs v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harishchandra Gangaram Pedamakr Since Decd. Thr Lrs v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

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

Ambanna Dhundappa Koli Vs President, Shri. Narsinha Krida and Shikshan Prasarak Mandal and Ors.

Ambanna Dhundappa Koli Vs President, Shri. Narsinha Krida and Shikshan Prasarak Mandal and Ors.

Tata Capital Financial Services Limited vs Dashmesh Tractors

Dnyandeo Bhimrao Alhat Vs Giddayya Mukkappa and Ors.

Dr. Vijay Vasudev Bedekar Vs Parshuram Pandurang Puranik Decd. Thr. Lhrs Alpana Ajit Puranik and Ors.

Sushma Vishwanath Konde Vs Meena Pramod Jadhav and Anr.