Shamrao Bhaga Bhoi Deceased Thr Lrs Meerabai Shamrao Bhoi Vs Jagdeesh Hiralal Agrawal Deceased Thr Lrs Kaushal Jagdeesh Agrawal — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Shamrao Bhaga Bhoi Deceased Thr Lrs Meerabai Shamrao Bhoi Vs Jagdeesh Hiralal Agrawal Deceased Thr Lrs Kaushal Jagdeesh Agrawal — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Civil application allowed in terms of prayer clause 'B' to 'G' — legal heirs of the deceased petitioner and of the deceased respondent brought on record; amendment to be carried out within two weeks.

Issue for consideration

Whether the legal representatives of the deceased petitioner and of the deceased respondent should be brought on record in WP/3440/2006 and the delay in doing so condoned. +1 more

Court's answer

The delay in bringing the legal heirs of the deceased petitioner on record is satisfactorily explained: the applicants are illiterate and were unaware of the pending proceeding until the bailiff of Civil Court, Parola enquired about its status.

Ratio / Principle

The delay in bringing the legal heirs of the respondent is covered on the same footing: the petitioner's heirs learnt of the respondent's death from the petitioner's own legal heirs, which is why a single combined application was filed for both sides.

Key takeaways

The Supreme Court precedent in Puran Singh v. State of Punjab relied upon by the respondent (that delay cannot be condoned absent reasonable and satisfactory explanation) cannot be made applicable to the present case because the applicant has given a satisfactory explanation for the delay.ratio¶¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Application No. 2218 of 2021 in WP/3440/2006 (High Court of Judicature of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench; Manjusha Deshpande, J.; 11.02.2025): Application to bring on record the legal heirs of the deceased petitioner Shamrao Bhaga Bhoi (expired 25.02.2016) and of the deceased sole respondent Jagdeesh Hiralal Agrawal (expired 05.10.2015) allowed in terms of prayer clauses 'B' to 'G', subject to payment of cost of Rs. 5,000/- to the respondents; amendment to be carried out within two weeks. The delay was held satisfactorily explained — the applicants are illiterate children of a fisherman who learnt of the pending proceeding only when the bailiff of Civil Court, Parola enquired about its status, and the petitioner's heirs learnt of the respondent's death from the petitioner's own heirs, prompting a combined application for both sides. The respondent's objection, resting on reliance on Puran Singh vs. State of Punjab, 1996 DGLS(SC) 138 (delay cannot be condoned in the absence of reasonable and satisfactory explanation), was rejected: the precedent was held inapplicable in view of the satisfactory explanation given by the applicant.

2025:BHC-AUG:3870

{1}

902-wp-3440-2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2218 OF 2021 IN WP/3440/2006

Shamrao Bhaga Bhoi Deceased Thr Lrs Meerabai Shamrao Bhoi

VERSUS

Jagdeesh Hiralal Agrawal Deceased Thr Lrs Kaushal Jagdeesh Agrawal

Mr. M.N. Navandar., Advocate for Applicant Mr. Sumit Agrawal, Advocate for respondents No. 1 to 3

CORAM : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.

DATE : 11^th FEBRUARY, 2025

ORDER :

Learned advocate Shri. Sumit Agrawal submits that though remark on the board shows that notice issued to respondent No. 1 to 3 are awaited as they are not residing on given address, however, he has instructions to cause appearance on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3 and he has already filed his vakalatnama. Therefore, the service is complete.

This civil application is filed for bringing legal representatives of petitioner as well as respondent on record. The petitioner has expired on 25.02.2016 and he is survived by legal heirs, whose details are mentioned in para 9 of the

Bhagyawant Punde

{2} 902-wp-3440-2006

application. The sole respondent has expired on 05.10.2015 and he is survived by legal heirs, whose details are given in para 10 of the application.

It is the contention of the applicants that their father is fisherman. They are illiterate and they are unaware about the pending proceeding in this Court. When bailiff of Civil Court, Parola enquired with them about status of pending proceeding, they came to know about the pendency of proceeding before this Court. Considering the explanation given in para 5 as regards delay in bringing legal heirs of petitioner on record, the delay is satisfactorily explained.

So far as delay in bringing legal heirs of respondent is concerned, it is from the legal heirs of petitioner they came to know about death of respondent. Hence, combine application has been filed by applicant for bringing legal heirs of petitioner as well as respondent on record.

Learned advocate for the respondent has taken objection on the ground that legal heirs of petitioner were aware about death of respondent, in spite of that he has prolonged the proceeding since they are tenant of the suit premises and stay is

Bhagyawant Punde

{3} 902-wp-3440-2006

operating in their favour. In that regard he places reliance on judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Puran Singh vs. State of Punjab , 1996 DGLS(SC) 138. In the same judgment it is also observed that in case of absence of reasonable and satisfactory explanation the delay cannot be condoned. But in the present case considering the satisfactory explanation given by the applicant, the case law cannot be made applicable to the present case.

Considering the explanation given by applicant for delay in bringing legal heirs of petitioner as well as respondent on record, civil application is allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’ to ‘G’, subject to payment of cost of Rs. 5,000/- to the respondents.

Amendment to be carried out within two weeks from

today.

Civil Application stands disposed of.

(MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.)

Bhagyawant Punde