Vikas Kapoor vs Satyapal Kapoor — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Vikas Kapoor vs Satyapal Kapoor — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Delays of 4799 days (Defendant no.17), 2904 days (Defendant no.14), 1808 days (Defendant no.16) and 148 days (Plaintiff no.3) condoned; Interim Application allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) to (f), including setting aside the abatement of the Suit, if any, and amending the plaint and proceedings per Schedule Exhibit “I”; amendments to be completed within three weeks and served on the other parties within two weeks thereafter with affidavit of service; application disposed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the delays in taking out the Interim Application seeking to bring on record the legal heirs of the deceased Plaintiff no.3 and Defendants no.14, 16 and 17 (and to delete the names of Defendant no.17, Defendant no.14, Defendant no.16 and Plaintiff no.3) should be condoned and the application allowed.

Court's answer

The Court condoned the respective delays in taking out the Interim Application - 4799 days (to delete Defendant no.17), 2904 days (Defendant no.14), 1808 days (Defendant no.16) and 148 days (Plaintiff no.3) - and allowed the application in terms of prayer clauses (a) to (f).

Ratio / Principle

The amendments are to be carried out in the plaint and the proceedings within a period of three weeks, the amended plaint and proceedings served on the others within two weeks thereafter, and an appropriate affidavit of service filed.

Key takeaways

The Interim Application stands allowed and disposed accordingly.ratio¶33
The Suit and the Notice of Motion are to be listed under the caption ‘for directions’ on 3rd February 2026.obiter¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction) - Abhay Ahuja, J. Interim Application No. 1805 of 2024 in Suit No. 1260 of 2007 (with Notice of Motion No. 967 of 2016): Applicants Vikas Kapoor and another, the original plaintiffs, sought to bring on record the legal heirs of deceased Plaintiff no.3 and Defendants no.14, 16 and 17. The Court, noting that service had been effected on all Respondents including the legal heirs and that counsel for some Defendants raised no objection, condoned delays of 4799 days (deletion of Defendant no.17), 2904 days (Defendant no.14), 1808 days (Defendant no.16) and 148 days (Plaintiff no.3), allowed the application in terms of prayer clauses (a) to (f) - comprising condonation of the delays, setting aside the abatement of the Suit, if any, and amendment of the plaint and proceedings per Schedule Exhibit “I” - directed that the amendments be carried out within three weeks and the amended plaint and proceedings be served on the others within two weeks thereafter with an affidavit of service, allowed and disposed of the application, and listed the Suit and Notice of Motion under caption ‘for directions’ on 3rd February 2026.

21-S-1260-2007.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1805 OF 2024 IN

SUIT NO. 1260 OF 2007

VIKAS KAPOOR AND ANOTHER )...APPLICANTS IN THE MATTER BETWEEN VIKAS KAPOOR AND OTHERS )...PLAINTIFFS

V/s.

VISHWANATH MANJUNATH RAYKAR AND ORS. )...DEFENDANTS WITH

SUIT NO.1260 OF 2007

WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 967 OF 2016

IN

SUIT NO.1260 OF 2007

Mr.Nitin Raut a/w. Ms.Krisandra Hegde, Advocate for the Applicants/Original Plaintiffs.

Mr.Anshul Kochar i/by Mr.Vijay B. Dhingreja, Advocate for the Defendants no.1 to 5, 8 and 11 to 13.

Mr.U.V.Singh i/by Mr.Anil R. Mishra, Advocate for the Defendant no.15.

P.C. :

This Interim Application seeks to bring on record the heirs of the

ARTI VILAS KHATATE

Digitally signed by ARTI VILAS KHATATE Date: 2025.12.24 10:32:04 +0530

deceased Plaintiff no.3 and Defendants no.14, 16 and 17 after condoning delays mentioned in the application.

avk 1/3

21-S-1260-2007.doc

Mr.Nitin Raut, learned Counsel, appears for the Applicants /Original Plaintiffs and submits that service has been effected on all the Respondents including the legal heirs. The Counsel appearing in the matter on behalf of some of the Defendants have no objection if the Interim Application is allowed.

Having heard the learned Counsel and having considered the submissions made in the application, for the reasons contained therein, this Court is of the view that the respective delays be condoned and the application be allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) to (f) which read thus :

(a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to condone the delay of 4799 days in taking out the present Interim Application to delete the name of Defendant no.17;

(b) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to condone the delay of 2904 days in taking out the present Interim Application to delete the name of Defendant no.14;

(c) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to condone the delay of 1808 days in taking out the present Interim Application to delete the name of Defendant no.16;

(d) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to condone the delay of 148 days in taking out the present Interim Application to delete the name of Plaintiff no.3;

avk 2/3

21-S-1260-2007.doc

(e) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to set aside the abatement of the Suit, if any;

(f) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to permit the Applicants to amend the plaint and proceedings in terms of the Schedule being Exhibit “I” hereto;

Let the amendments be carried out in the plaint and the proceedings within a period of three weeks and the amended plaint and proceedings be served on the others in two weeks thereafter, and an appropriate Affidavit of service be filed.

The Interim Application, accordingly, stands allowed and disposed as above.

SUIT NO.1260 OF 2007

WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 967 OF 2016 IN SUIT NO.1260 OF 2007

List the Suit and the Notice of Motion under the caption ‘for directions’ on 3rd February 2026.

(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)

avk 3/3