Encore Asset Reconstruction Company Private Limited v. Sheela Sunil Kumar Edakayat

Bombay HC27 Nov 2025CHOL/573/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay; O.S. Rule 986; office objections non-compliance; rejection and restoration of Execution Application; Chamber Order CHOL/573/2025; EXA(L)/36875/2022; costs Rs. 2,500/- to The Bombay Bar Association's Charitable Trust; Prothonotary and Senior Master; Anil H. Laddhad; unopposed; two-week cure period; Order dated 09.09.2024 set aside as prayed.

What did the court decide?

Chamber Order granted as prayed: delay of 101 days condoned and the rejection Order dated 09.09.2024 set aside, subject to (i) payment of Rs. 2,500/- as costs to 'The Bombay Bar Association's Charitable Trust' within three working days of uploading of the order, and (ii) removal of office objections and registration/numbering of the Execution Application within two weeks of payment of cost. ¶¶22

Encore Asset Reconstruction Company Private Limited vs Sheela Sunil Kumar Edakayat — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the delay of 101 days in complying with office objections — whose non-compliance led to rejection of the Execution Application under O.S. Rule 986 — should be condoned. +1 more

¶¶15

Court's answer

Considering the reasons stated, one opportunity is required to be given to the Applicant to pursue the captioned matter.

¶¶16

Ratio / Principle

None appeared for the Respondents to contest the present Chamber Order.

¶¶16

Key takeaways

The present Chamber Order is granted as prayed, condoning delay of 101 days, upon payment of cost of Rs. 2,500/- to 'The Bombay Bar Association's Charitable Trust', payable within three working days from uploading of the order.ratio¶¶22
Upon payment of the costs, the Applicant is to remove the office objections on the Execution Application and have the same registered and/or numbered within two weeks from the date of payment of cost.ratio¶¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Unopposed Chamber Order (CHOL/573/2025 in EXA(L)/36875/2022), before the Prothonotary and Senior Master (Anil H. Laddhad), dated 27.11.2025: delay of 101 days in curing office objections — whose non-compliance had caused rejection on 09.09.2024 of the Execution Application under O.S. Rule 986 — was condoned and the Chamber Order was granted as prayed. Conditions imposed: (i) costs of Rs. 2,500/- payable to 'The Bombay Bar Association's Charitable Trust' within three working days of uploading of the order; and (ii) removal of office objections and registration/numbering of the Execution Application within two weeks of payment, failing which the Execution Application shall stand rejected afresh under O.S. Rule 986. None appeared for the Respondents.

¶1

Before : Anil H. Laddhad

¶2

Prothonotary and Senior Master

¶3

Date : 27^th November, 2025

¶4

FOR HEARING AND FINAL DISPOSAL :

¶5

CHOL/573/2025 IN

¶6

EXA(L)/36875/2022

¶7

) Mr. Daneel Pancras i/b. Mr. Archit Virmani, ) Advocate for Applicant

¶8

)

¶9

)

¶10

) P.C. : The present Chamber Order is taken out by ) the Applicant for setting aside Order dated ) 09.09.2024, rejecting captioned Execution ) Application under O.S.Rule 986 for non) compliance of office objections.

¶11

)

¶12

) Affidavit of Service showing service of present ) Chamber Order is taken on record.

¶13

)

¶14

) Heard Ld. Advocate for the Applicant. Perused ) Affidavit in Support to the Chamber Order. It is ) contended that due to personal difficulties and ) shifting of office, Advocate could not comply office ) objections within time and the matter got rejected. )

¶15

) Ld. Advocate for the Applicant submits that he will ) pursue with the captioned matter diligently if it is ) restored to file, hence, present Chamber Order be ) granted by condoning delay of 101 days. )

¶16

Considering reasons, as above, one opportunity is required to be given to the Applicant to pursue with the captioned matter. Moreover, none appeared for and on behalf of the Respondents to contest the present Chamber Order.

¶17

)

¶18

)

¶19

)

¶20

)

¶21

) ) ) ) ) )

¶22

In view thereof, present Chamber Order is ) granted, as prayed, by condoning delay of 101 ) ) days, upon payment of cost of Rs. 2,500/- to ‘The ) Bombay Bar Association’s Charitable Trust’ be ) paid within three working days from the date of ) uploading of this order. The Chamber Order is ) signed separately.

¶23

…. 2

¶24

Prothonotary and Senior Master Date : 27^th November, 2025

¶25

…. Continued

¶26

: 2 :

¶27

) Upon payment of cost as mentioned above, the ) Applicant to remove office objections on the ) Execution Application and get the same registered ) and/or numbered within two weeks from the date

¶28

) of payment of cost, failing the Execution ) Application to stand rejected for non-compliance

¶29

) of office objections under O.S.Rule 986.

¶30

Date : 27.11.2025

¶31

Prothonotary & Senior Master

¶32

Digitally M N signed by MN KadamDate: Kadam 2025.11.2817:14:21 +0530

Encore Asset Reconstruction Company Private Limited v. Sheela Sunil Kumar Edakayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Encore Asset Reconstruction Company Private Limited v. Sheela Sunil Kumar Edakayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jyoti Suresh Badakere Vs Shankerrao Ramrao Badakere (Deceased)

Nadipuram Desikachar Narasimhan vs Nadipuram Desikachar Shantha (Deceased)

Sanjay Vijayshi Udeshi vs Varsha Vijayshi Udeshi ( Deceased)

Nutan S Munot petitioner vs Shakuntala Subhash Munot alias Shakuntala S Munot alias S S Munot Deceased no 1

Bhaven Mahendra Shah vs Mahendra Khetsey Shah @ Munvar @ Mahindra Shah (Deceased)

Mahesh Gopi S/O. Krishnan Gopi Alias Krishnan Mahesh Gopi vs Jayalaxmi Gopi Alias Jayalekshmi Gopi W/O. Krishnan Gopi (Deceased)