Sayabai Vikram Baviskar L.Rs. Madhukar Vikram Baviskar Vs Durgabai Ramdas Sapkale and Others. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Sayabai Vikram Baviskar L.Rs. Madhukar Vikram Baviskar Vs Durgabai Ramdas Sapkale and Others. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Civil application allowed as prayed for: delay condoned, abatement order (if any) set aside, and the legal representative brought on record, subject to amendment in the second appeal within a week and supply of the amended memo to the respondents within one week thereafter.

Issue for consideration

Whether the delay in filing the application for setting aside the abatement order of the deceased sole appellant should be condoned, the abatement order (if any) set aside, and the legal representative of the original appellant brought on record in Second Appeal No. 322 of 1995.

Court's answer

In the interest of justice, the delay in filing the application for setting aside the abatement order is condoned, and the abatement order, if any, is set aside.

Ratio / Principle

The name of the applicant, the legal representative of the original appellant, is to be brought on record.

Key takeaways

The relief is subject to conditions: the applicant must carry out the amendment in the second appeal within a week and supply a copy of the amended memo to the respondents within one week thereafter, failing which the second appeal shall stand dismissed without reference to the Court; matter listed on 09 October 2025.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delay condonation — abatement — legal representative brought on record. The applicant, sole legal representative of the original appellant in Second Appeal No. 322 of 1995 (admitted 24 August 1995), sought condonation of delay in applying to set aside abatement. The original appellant died on 16 September 2004; her counsel learnt of the death only on 22 February 2025. Held, in the interest of justice, delay condoned, abatement (if any) set aside, and the legal representative brought on record, conditioned on amendment within a week and service of the amended memo on the respondents within one week thereafter, failing which the second appeal would stand dismissed without reference to the Court. Application allowed; second appeal listed for 09 October 2025.

2025:BHC-AUG:27369

934-CA-2748-25.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2748 OF 2025 IN

SECOND APPEAL NO. 322 OF 1995

Sayabai Vikram Baviskar (Died) Through her sole L.R. Madhukar Vikram Baviskar ..APPLICANT

VERSUS

Durgabai Ramdas Sapkale and Others ..RESPONDENTS

Mr. R.F. Totala, Advocate for the applicant

Mr. S.V. Dixit, Advocate h/f Mr. V.J. Dixit, Advocate for respondent nos.1 to 6

CORAM : ABHAY J. MANTRI, J. DATE : 25^th SEPTEMBER, 2025

PER COURT :

The applicant, legal representative of the original appellant, has moved this application to condone the delay in filing the application for setting aside the abatement order of the sole appellant, for setting aside the abatement order, as well as for bringing his name on record.

Learned counsel for the applicant also submitted that he has served notice of the application on the other side. Despite the service of notice, none appear on their behalf.

Learned counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 6 formally objected to the application.

1 / 2

934-CA-2748-25.odt

Perused the application and record. It appears that in the year 1995, by order dated 24^th August, 1995, the second appeal was admitted, and it was pending for final hearing. Therefore, the original appellant could not contact the learned counsel. During the pendency of the appeal, on 16^th September 2004, the original appellant expired. However, the said fact came to the knowledge of learned counsel for the applicant for the first time on 22^nd February, 2025, and thereafter he has filed this application.

Having considered the reasons disclosed in the application, in the interest of justice, I deem it appropriate to condone the delay in filing the application for setting aside the abatement order, set aside the abatement order, if any, passed, and to bring the name of the applicant /legal representative of the original appellant on record.

In view of the above, the civil application is allowed as prayed for. The applicant is to carry out the amendment in the second appeal within a week and supply a copy of the amended memo to the respondents within one week thereafter, failing which the second appeal shall stand dismissed without reference to the Court. List the second appeal on 09^th October, 2025.

( ABHAY J. MANTRI, J. )

SSD

2 / 2