In a writ petition, the Bombay High Court made the rule absolute allowing the petitioner to challenge an order dismissing an appeal for non-prosecution, accepting reasons for the petitioner's failure to appear despite notice.
Rule made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a); petitioner allowed to challenge the impugned order.
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.
19-wp-8688-2022.doc
Shabnoor
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.8688 OF 2022
SHABNOOR AYUB PATHAN Digitally signed bySHABNOOR AYUBPATHAN Date: 2024.04.3018:50:24 +0530
Pravin Jayantilal Patel … Petitioner V/s. Mahesh Patel … Respondent
Mr. Shrishailya S. Deshmukh, for Petitioner.
CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : APRIL 30, 2024
P.C.:
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
1
19-wp-8688-2022.doc
remain present. Therefore, considering reasons stated in paragraphs 10 to 12 of the petition, Rule made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).
(AMIT BORKAR, J.)
2
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging an order dismissing an appeal for non-prosecution deserves to be allowed due to the respondent's non-appearance.
Whether considerations stated in the petition justify making the rule absolute.
Whether the petitioner's explanation for non-appearance warrants granting relief.
SHABNOOR AYUB PATHAN
Pravin Jayantilal Patel
AMIT BORKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
