Disposed

Shri. Tukaram Bhika Gotarne v. Hiraman Buwaji Gotarne and Ors.

Bombay HC14 Mar 2024IA/1895/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order adjudicates two interim applications regarding the condonation of delay for adding legal representatives in a 1997 writ petition. The court found the reasons provided by petitioners justifiable for both delays (23 and 9 years). Both applications were allowed, directing necessary amendments within two weeks. The main writ petition was listed for directions.

What did the court decide?

Both interim applications for condonation of delay to add legal representatives were allowed. Amendments to bring names on record must be carried out within two weeks.

Shri. Tukaram Bhika Gotarne Vs Hiraman… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Digitally signed byVARSHA VARSHA VIJAY VIJAY RAJGURU RAJGURU Date:2024.03.15 12:13:07 +0530

¶2

1-wp-3265-1997-ia-1895-2024++.doc

¶3

varsha

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 3265 OF 1997

¶6

Hiraman Buwaji Gotarne and Ors … Petitioners

¶7

vs.

¶8

S.D.O. Nashik Division, Nashik and Ors … Respondents

¶9

WITH

¶10

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1895 OF 2024

¶11

¶12

WRIT PETITION NO. 3265 OF 1997

¶13

WITH

¶14

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1894 OF 2024

¶15

¶16

WRIT PETITION NO. 3265 OF 1997

¶17

Shri Tukaram Bhika Gotarne … Petitioners

¶18

vs.

¶19

Hiraman Buwaji Gotarne and Ors … Respondents

¶20

WITH

¶21

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10150 OF 1998

¶22

¶23

WRIT PETITION NO. 3265 OF 1997

¶24

Mhalsakant G. Deshpande and Ors … Petitioners

¶25

vs.

¶26

Hiraman Buwaji Gotarne and Ors … Respondents

¶27

Mr. Gunjan Shah i/b. P.B. Shah, for Petitioners.

¶28

Mr. Gaurav Ugale i/b. Shriram Kulkarni, for Respondent Nos. 5 to 9.

¶29

Page no. 1 of 3

¶30

1-wp-3265-1997-ia-1895-2024++.doc

¶31

Mrs. M.P. Thakur, AGP for the State.

¶32

CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATED : 14^th MARCH, 2024

¶33

P.C. :-

¶34

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1894 OF 2024

¶35

This application is for bringing on record names of heirs and legal representatives of deceased-petitioner no.3. There is a delay of more than 23 years in filing the application. The reasons for condonation of delay are stated in the application.

¶36

Learned counsel for respondent nos. 5 to 8, vehemently, opposes the application. They have filed affidavit-in-reply opposing the said application and disputed the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay. The said affidavit-in-reply is taken on record.

¶37

I have considered the reasons given in the application and in particular paragraph nos. 3 and 5 of the application. The reasons stated in the application are justifiable. Hence, for the reasons stated in the application, it is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b) and (c). Amendment to be carried out within two weeks.

¶38

Page no. 2 of 3

¶39

1-wp-3265-1997-ia-1895-2024++.doc

¶40

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1895 OF 2024

¶41

This application is for bringing on record names of heirs and legal representatives of petitioner no.1. There is a delay of more than 9 years caused in filing this application.

¶42

Learned counsel for respondent nos. 5 to 8, vehemently, opposes the application. They have filed affidavit-in-reply opposing the said application and disputed the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay. The said affidavit-in-reply is taken on record.

¶43

I have considered the reasons given in the application and in particular paragraph nos. 3 and 5 of the application. The reasons stated in the application are justifiable. Hence, for the reasons stated in the application, it is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b) and (c). Amendment to be carried out within two weeks.

¶44

List the writ petition on 4^th April 2024.

¶45

To be listed under the caption for ‘direction’.

¶46

(GAURI GODSE, J.)

¶47

Page no. 3 of 3

Shri. Tukaram Bhika Gotarne v. Hiraman Buwaji Gotarne and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Tukaram Bhika Gotarne v. Hiraman Buwaji Gotarne 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

Mr. Pawan Ravindra Panchal and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shri Vijay Uttam Balwadkar and Anr. Vs Shri Umesh Manohar Korade and Anr.

Arun Gurav and Ors. Vs Gorai Mitratva Co.Op. Soc. Ltd. Thru Chairman and Ors.

M/S. Saaqi Hotel Vs State of Maharashtra and 2 Ors.

The Estate Investment Co. Pvt. Ltd., Vs M/S. Shelter Developers and Others.

Dilip Vasant Shinde Vs the Ichalkaranji Central Co-Op.C.W.and R.S.Ltd.and Ors.