Disposed

Ramesh Tepan Proprietor v. M/S. Devi Construction Company Now Devi Construction Limited Lability Thr. Its Partners and Ors.

Bombay HC8 Feb 2024WP/7695/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged conditional leave to defend in a Special Summary Suit but withdrew the challenge, seeking expeditious disposal of the suit citing his advanced age (84). The Court disposed of the petition with directions to the trial court to decide the suit within six months without unnecessary adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Direction to dispose of Special Summary Suit No.222/2018 expeditiously, preferably within six months.

Ramesh Tepan Proprietor Vs M/S. Devi Construction… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

P2.WP.7695.2023.doc

¶2

HARSHADA H. SAWANT (P.A.)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.7695 OF 2023

¶6

Ramesh Tepan Proprietor Petitioner

¶7

.. (Orig. Plaintiff)

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s. Devi Construction Company and Ors. Respondents

¶10

.. (Orig. Defendants)

¶11

Mr. Rushikesh S. Kekane i./by Mr. R. B. Jagtap, Advocate for Petitioner.

¶12

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : FEBRUARY 08, 2024

¶13

P.C.:

¶14

1. Mentioned. Not on Board. Taken on Board.

¶15

2. Heard Mr. Kekane, learned Advocate for Petitioner.

¶16

3. Perused the praecipe dated 07.02.2024 and the copy of Writ

¶17

Petition.

¶18

4. An application is made by Mr. Kekane, learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner seeking expeditious disposal of the suit despite challenge maintained to the order granting conditional leave to defend in Special Summary Suit calling upon the Defendants to deposit the amount of Rs.5,00,000/-.

¶19

5. On taking instructions Mr. Kekane would submit that Petitioner does not wish to maintain the challenge any further and urges the Court to pass appropriate directions in view of advanced age

¶20

1 of 2

¶21

P2.WP.7695.2023.doc

¶22

of the Petitioner being 84 years old to expedite the suit proceedings. The Application made by Mr. Kekane is fair and is accepted by the Court.

¶23

6. In view of the above, without delineating anything on merits of the matter and opining on the impugned order the Writ Petition stands disposed of with a direction to the learned Joint Civil Judge Senior Division Pune to dispose of Special Summary Suit No.222/2018 as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of six months from today. Parties to the suit are directed by this Court not to seek adjournments and the learned Trial Court shall not give any unnecessary adjournments to the parties unless absolutely necessary. Parties are requested by this Court to co-operate with the learned Trial Court for expeditious disposal of the suit.

¶24

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

¶25

H. H. SAWANT

¶26

[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

¶27

Digitally signed HARSHADAHANUMANT by HARSHADAHANUMANTSAWANT SAWANT Date: 2024.02.08 15:11:09 +0530

¶28

2 of 2

Ramesh Tepan Proprietor v. M/S. Devi Construction Company Now Devi Construction Limited Lability Thr. Its Partners and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Tepan Proprietor v. M/S. Devi Construction Company Now Devi Construction Limited Lability Thr. Its Partners and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prakash Sahadev Rane and Ors. Vs Vikas Sahadev Rane

Shri. Dhananjay Gulabrao Kanchan and Ors. Vs Shri Sahebrao Madhav Kanchan and Ors.

Popat Dnyandeo Ghadage and Anr. Vs Santosh Bhagwat Keche and Ors.

Feroz Khan Abdur Raheman Khan Vs Balu Sakharam Shinde and Ors.

Nandkumar Dhanaji Bhosle and Ors. Vs Arun Balkrishna Shelar and Ors.

Shree Gagandeep Co. Operative Housing Society Ltd. vs Harshad Mehta and Anr.