Disposed

Dhruva Woollen Miils Private Limited v. Bijon Dhirendra Talukdar

Bombay HC26 Jul 2024IA/8251/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second appeal concerning a property dispute where the court allowed substitution of the appellant's name, deleted a deceased respondent, condoned a two-day delay in filing, and listed the appeal for settlement discussions.

What did the court decide?

Amendment of cause title permitted, deceased respondent deleted, two-day delay condoned; appeal listed for settlement on 16 August 2024.

Dhruva Woollen Miils Private Limited vs Bijon Dhirendra… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

15.4667.23 sast.docx

¶2

Iresh

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

SECOND APPEAL ST NO. 4667 OF 2023 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 8251 OF 2024 IN

¶5

SECOND APPEAL ST NO. 4667 OF 2023 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 10560 OF 2024 IN

¶6

SECOND APPEAL ST NO. 4667 OF 2023

¶7

IRESH MASHAL

¶8

Digitally signed by IRESH MASHAL Date: 2024.07.29 13:17:31 +0530

¶9

Dhruva Wollen Mills Pvt Ltd

¶10

Vs.

¶11

Bijono Dhirendra Talukdar

¶12

.....Appellant

¶13

.....Respondent

¶14

Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar a/w Mr. Abir Patel, Ms. Lavina Bhargava i/b Wadia Ghandy & Co. for appellant

¶15

Mr. Vikramjit Garewal i/b Mr. Ruturaj V. Bankar for respondents

¶16

CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATE : 26^th JULY 2024

¶17

ORDER:

¶18

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 10560 OF 2024:

¶19

1. Due to the technical error of connectivity, I was unable to access

¶20

the soft copy. Hard copy tendered by the learned counsel for the appellant is taken on record.

¶21

1/3

¶22

15.4667.23 sast.docx

¶23

This application is for seeking leave to amend the cause title of the second appeal substituting the name of original appellant with the name ‘Runwal Developers Private Limited’. The reasons for the amendment are explained in the application.

¶24

Learned counsel for respondents submits that respondent no. 1 has expired on 13^th September 2023 during the pendency of the second appeal. He submits that respondent no. 2 is the heir and legal representative of respondent no. 1. Hence, he has no objection for permitting the applicant to delete respondent no. 1 and also permit the amendment as prayed in the schedule of amendment of the application.

¶25

Hence, applicants are permitted to delete respondent no. 1. For the reasons stated in the application, applicants are permitted to carry out amendment to the second appeal as per proposed amendment in schedule ‘C’. Amendment to be carried out in the second appeal and applications within three weeks from today.

¶26

Application is disposed of in above terms.

¶27

2/3

¶28

15.4667.23 sast.docx

¶29

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 8251 OF 2024:

¶30

This application is for condonation of delay of two days in filing the second appeal.

¶31

Reasons for the delay are explained in the application and the same are acceptable.

¶32

For the reasons stated in the application, delay is condoned and

¶33

the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).

¶34

SECOND APPEAL ST NO. 4667 OF 2023:

¶35

Learned counsel for respondent submits that he has given a proposal for one time settlement.

¶36

Learned counsel for the appellant seeks time to take instructions with regard to one time settlement.

¶37

List the second appeal under the caption “For Settlement” on 16^th

¶38

August 2024.

¶39

[GAURI GODSE, J.]

¶40

3/3

Dhruva Woollen Miils Private Limited v. Bijon Dhirendra Talukdar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhruva Woollen Miils Private Limited v. Bijon Dhirendra Talukdar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sanjay Gaurishankar Sharma and Anr. vs Devang Dinesh Parmar and Ors.

Kulbhushan Bhimrao Udgave and Ors. vs Sunil Shantinath Udgave and Ors.

Shri Raghunath Ramchandra Patil and Anr. vs Shri Shiva Dadu Patil Since Deceased through Lrs and Anr.

Shiv Infra Vision Pvt. Ltd. vs K S Chamankar Enterprise

Nandkumar Constructions and Anr. vs Tasgaon Taluka Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. and Ors.

Fayyaj Abdul Rajjak Shaikh vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Collector Nashik and Ors.