The High Court of Bombay dismissed a Civil Revision Application filed under Section 115 CPC due to the applicant's persistent failure to argue the matter over 11 dates, leading to a disposition without substantive examination.
No case made out; Civil Revision Application is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
15-cra601-18.doc
vai
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Digitally signed VASANT by VASANT ANANDRAO ANANDRAO IDHOL IDHOL Date: 2024.04.29 12:03:36 +0530 CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.601 OF 2018
Vishwanath S. Pai & Ors. ...Applicants V/s. Sunita W. Pai & Ors. ...Respondents
Mr.Shailesh Salvi for the Applicants.
Ms.Prajakta Shringarpure i/b Bina Pai for the Respondents.
CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J. DATE : 7TH MARCH , 2024.
P.C. :-
1/3
15-cra601-18.doc
2019, 20 August 2019, 11 September 2019, 25 September 2019, 10 October 2019, 14 November 2019, 16 January 2020, 6 February 2020, 11 March 2020 and 15 February 2024, the Applicants by consent sought adjournments and were not ready to argue the matter. On 9 November 2022, it was made clear to the Applicants that if they don’t proceed with the matter on next date, this Court will be constrained to dismiss the matter.
Radhakrishna’ died on 20 January 1960, the tenancy of the two premises were transferred in the name of his nephew, “Waman” (husband of Defendant No.1). Plaintiffs are the legal heirs of one Shrirang’ (another nephew of original tenant Radhakrishna). The transfer of rent receipt is not challenged. Both the Courts held that Plaintiffs2/3
15-cra601-18.doc
have failed to prove their tenancy rights in both the suit premises. Hence the suit for declaration of tenancy was dismissed.
(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)
3/3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Civil Revision Application should be dismissed due to the applicant's consistent failure to argue the matter despite multiple adjournments.
Whether to uphold the dismissal of the underlying R.A.D. Suit regarding tenancy rights.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vishwanath S. Pai
Sunita W. Pai
Rajesh S. Patil
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court