Allowed¶20

Sunanda Sunilkumar Jain v. Pushpa Avinash Singhai

Bombay HC25 Nov 2025IA/7407/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay HC Testamentary; IA 7407/2025 in Caveat (L) 38368/2022 in TP 668/2020; recall of conditional order dated 29-07-2025; caveat dismissed August 2025 for non-removal of office objections; restoration of caveat; caveatrix senior citizen advocate, party in person, Amravati; due diligence; office objections to be removed by 16-12-2025; IA allowed; IA(L) 16142/2024 listed 18-12-2025 circulation; Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.; 8 December 2025.

What did the court decide?

Recall of the conditional order dated 29th July, 2025 by which the Caveat was dismissed; Caveat restored subject to removal of office objections on or before 16th December, 2025; Interim Application allowed in the above terms. Interim Application (L) No. 16142 of 2024 listed on 18th December, 2025 under the caption for 'circulation'. ¶20

Sunanda Sunilkumar Jain vs Pushpa Avinash Singhai — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the conditional order dated 29th July, 2025, by which Caveat (L) No. 38368 of 2022 came to be dismissed for non-removal of office objections, ought to be recalled and the Caveat restored notwithstanding the lapse of time since its filing in 2022.

¶11

Court's answer

There is sufficient explanation for restoration of the Caveat, and accordingly the conditional order dated 29th July, 2025 is recalled.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

The office objections to the Caveat are to be removed on or before 16th December, 2025.

¶19

Key takeaways

In any event, the Petitioner has also filed an application for dismissal of the Caveat, which can be taken up for consideration.obiter¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction), Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.; order dated 8th December, 2025 in Interim Application No. 7407 of 2025 in Caveat (L) No. 38368 of 2022 in Testamentary Petition No. 668 of 2020 (Sunanda Sunilkumar Jain and Others v. Pushpa Avinash Singhai). The Caveat, filed in 2022 by the Caveatrix - a senior citizen, an Advocate resident of Amravati - as party in person, was dismissed in August, 2025 pursuant to a conditional order dated 29th July, 2025 for non-removal of office objections. The Applicants sought recall, pleading ignorance of the removal-of-office-objections procedure and prompt filing immediately upon dismissal. Held, there was sufficient explanation for restoration: the order dated 29th July, 2025 was recalled, office objections were directed to be removed on or before 16th December, 2025, and the Interim Application was allowed in those terms. The Court observed that the Petitioner's application for dismissal of the Caveat could be taken up for consideration. Interim Application (L) No. 16142 of 2024 listed on 18th December, 2025 under the caption 'circulation'. No statute or precedent was cited in the order.

¶1

27 IA-7407-2025.doc

¶2

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

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 7407 OF 2025 IN

¶4

CAVEAT (L) NO. 38368 OF 2022 IN TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 668 OF 2020

¶5

Sunanda Sunilkumar Jain and Others ...Applicants Versus Pushpa Avinash Singhai ...Respondent

¶6

INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 16142 OF 2024

¶7

Ms. Sunita Banis for Petitioner in TP No. 1021 of 2021 and IA No. 7407 of 2025. Mr. S. Shamim for Petitioner in TP No. 668 of 2020.

¶8

——————

¶9

Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J. Date : 8^th December, 2025.

¶10

P. C. :

¶11

1. Interim Application has been preferred seeking recall of conditional order dated 29^th July, 2025 by which the Caveat came to be dismissed for non-removal of office objections.

¶12

2. Learned counsel appearing for Applicant submits that the Caveat

¶13

was filed by the party in person in the year 2022 and came to be dismissed as the party in person was unaware of the procedure of removal of office objections. She submits that conditional order was passed in July, 2025 and Caveat came to be dismissed in August, 2025.

¶14

1 of 2

¶15

Sairaj

¶16

27 IA-7407-2025.doc

¶17

3. Learned counsel appearing for original Petitioner submits that no indulgence is required to be shown as Caveat was filed in the year 2022 and thereafter, no steps were taken by Caveatrix by reason of which the Petition for grant has been unnecessary delayed.

¶18

4. The specific pleading in the Application is that Caveatrix is senior citizens who is resident of Amravati and an Advocate and had been appearing as party in person. The order has been passed on 29^th July, 2025 and caveat came to be dismissed in August, 2025 and immediately the present Application has been filed, which demonstrates due diligence on the part of Applicants. In any event, the Petitioner has also filed application for dismissal of the Caveat, which can be taken up for consideration. As there is sufficient explanation for restoration of the caveat, the order of 29^th July, 2025 is recalled.

¶19

5. The office objections to be removed on or before 16^th December, 2025.

¶20

6. Interim Application is allowed in the above terms.

¶21