Krutika Sunil Patil v. Usha Vishnu Patil (Deceased)

Bombay HC17 Sept 2025IA/3835/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay of 369 days in filing Testamentary Petition No. 3101 of 2021; Interim Application No. 3835 of 2024; Bombay High Court Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction; Milind N. Jadhav, J.; omnibus order contained in notice dated 15.06.2023 quashed and set aside; petition restored to record and file of the Court; prayer clauses (a) and (b) allowed; Krutika Sunil Patil; Usha Vishnu Patil (deceased); decided 05.12.2025.

What did the court decide?

Interim Application allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b): delay of 369 days condoned; omnibus order contained in the notice dated 15.06.2023 quashed and set aside; Petition restored to the record and file of the Court; Interim Application disposed. ¶¶18

Krutika Sunil Patil vs Usha Vishnu Patil (Deceased) — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

82.IA.3835.2024.doc

¶2

Ajay

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION

¶4

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3835 OF 2024 IN TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 3101 OF 2021

¶5

Krutika Sunil Patil	.. Applicant / Orig. Petitioner
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:
Usha Vishnu Patil	.. Deceased
Krutika Sunil Patil	.. Petitioner

¶6

Mr. Mohan L. Raut, Advocate i/by Mr. Vishal Narkar for Applicant / Petitioner.

¶7

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : DECEMBER 05, 2025.

¶8

P.C.:

¶9

Heard Mr. Raut, learned Advocate for Applicant / Petitioner.

¶10

Present Interim Application has been filed by Applicant for

¶11

condonation of delay. There is a delay of 369 days in filing the present Petition.

¶12

I have perused the Interim Application.

¶13

For the reasons stated in the Interim Application, Interim

¶14

Application deserves to be allowed due to exigency mentioned therein. The omnibus order contained in the notice dated 15.06.2023 stands quashed and set aside.

¶15

1 of 2

¶16

82.IA.3835.2024.doc

¶17