Allowed¶3

Radhabai Eknath Ladekar (Died) Thr Lrs Venkati Eknath Ladekar and Others v. M.S.R.T.C. through Divisional Manager Office, Parbhani

Bombay HC14 Nov 2025CA/10988/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

condonation of delay; impleading legal representatives (LRs) of deceased appellant; legal heirs brought on record; motor accident claim; first appeal FA/475/2008 pending since 2008; Civil Application No. 10988 of 2025; M.S.R.T.C. Divisional Manager Parbhani; no serious objection by respondents; interest of justice; appellant Nos. 1, 3 and 4; sufficient cause not mentioned; prayer clause delay particulars; Aurangabad Bench; Sushil M. Ghodeswar; 14-11-2025.

What did the court decide?

Delay in bringing the legal representatives of appellant Nos. 1, 3 and 4 on record condoned; the LRs were ordered to be brought on record forthwith in First Appeal FA/475/2008. ¶3

Radhabai Eknath Ladekar (Died) Thr Lrs Venkati Eknath Ladekar and Others Vs M.S.R.T.C. through Divisional Manager Office, Parbhani — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Delay in bringing the legal representatives of appellant Nos. 1, 3 and 4 on record condoned; the LRs were ordered to be brought on record forthwith in First Appeal FA/475/2008.

¶3

Issue for consideration

Whether the delay in bringing the legal representatives of the deceased appellant(s) on record in First Appeal FA/475/2008 should be condoned and the LRs impleaded. +1 more

¶1

Court's answer

Although the delay in bringing the legal representatives on record was huge/inordinate and sufficient cause for it was not stated, the Court found it necessary to implead the LRs and condone the delay because the matter pertains to a motor accident claim, the respondents raised no serious objection, and the impleading was required in the interest of justice to proceed further in the first appeal.

¶3

Ratio / Principle

On that basis the civil application was allowed and the delay was condoned as mentioned in the application.

¶3

Key takeaways

The legal representatives of appellant Nos. 1, 3 and 4 were directed to be brought on record forthwith, considering that the first appeal is of the year 2008.ratio¶3

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench (Sushil M. Ghodeswar, J.), 14 November 2025 - Civil Application No. 10988 of 2025 in FA/475/2008 (Radhabai Eknath Ladekar (died) through LRs Venkati Eknath Ladekar and others v. M.S.R.T.C., Divisional Manager Office, Parbhani): Application to bring the legal representatives of the deceased appellant(s) on record ALLOWED with condonation of delay, even though the delay was 'huge'/inordinate and sufficient cause for it was not mentioned in the application. The Court was moved by (i) the motor-accident-claim nature of the matter, (ii) the absence of any serious objection on behalf of the respondents, and (iii) the interest of justice in enabling the first appeal of the year 2008 to proceed. The legal representatives of appellant Nos. 1, 3 and 4 were directed to be brought on record forthwith.

Radhabai Eknath Ladekar (Died) Thr Lrs Venkati Eknath Ladekar and Others v. M.S.R.T.C. through Divisional Manager Office, Parbhani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Radhabai Eknath Ladekar (Died) Thr Lrs Venkati Eknath Ladekar and Others v. M.S.R.T.C. through Divisional Manager Office, Parbhani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Praful Vitthalrao Suryawanshi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vijay Sudam Koli Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Sameer S/O. Pandurang Phule Vs Yashoda @ Neeta @ Neha W/O. Sameer Phule

Rahul S/O. Suresh @ Sureshchandra Raka Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ravindra S/O. Bhimrao Sonwane Vs Sanjivani Ravindra Sonwane

The State of Maharashtra Vs Shobha Raghunathsingh Bayas