The Railway Goods Clearing and Forwarding Establishments Labour Board vs Nivrutti Sitaram Yewale — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

The Railway Goods Clearing and Forwarding Establishments Labour Board vs Nivrutti Sitaram Yewale — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed with an expedition direction: the Judge seized with Suit No. 72 of 1999 requested to hear and decide the Suit expeditiously, preferably within nine months from settlement of issues; parties directed not to seek unnecessary adjournments. No interference with the impugned City Civil Court order.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition challenging the City Civil Court order dated 20th September 2025 in Notice of Motion No. 2986 of 2024 (setting aside the ex parte order and permitting the Respondent-Defendant to file the Written Statement) ought to be entertained.

Court's answer

Having regard to the facts of the case, especially the dismissal of the Suit for want of prosecution and the Suit not being on the file of the Court for a considerable period, the Court expressed its disinclination to entertain the Petition.

Ratio / Principle

The submission that the hearing of the Suit instituted in the year 1999 be expedited appears to be justifiable, having regard to the date of the institution of the Suit.

Key takeaways

The learned Judge seized with Suit No.72 of 1999 is requested to hear and decide the Suit as expeditiously as possible, and preferably within a period of nine months from the date of settlement of issues.ratio¶23
The parties shall not seek unnecessary adjournments.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (N. J. Jamadar, J.) disposed of a writ petition by The Railway Goods Clearing And Forwarding Establishments Labour Board challenging the City Civil Court order dated 20th September 2025 in Notice of Motion No. 2986 of 2024, whereby an ex parte order was set aside and the Respondent-Defendant was permitted to file his Written Statement subject to costs of Rs.3,000/-. Noting that Suit No. 72 of 1999 had earlier been dismissed for want of prosecution and had remained off the file of the Court for a considerable period, the Court expressed its disinclination to entertain the challenge. On the Petitioner's Counsel submitting that the hearing of the 1999 Suit be expedited, the Court found the submission justifiable and requested the learned Judge seized with Suit No. 72 of 1999 to hear and decide the Suit as expeditiously as possible, preferably within nine months from the date of settlement of issues, and directed the parties not to seek unnecessary adjournments.

40-WP-14921-2025-MODIFIED.DOC

Arun Sankpal

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 14921 OF 2025

The Railway Goods Clearing And Forwarding Establishments Labour Board

..Petitioner

Versus

Nivrutti Sitaram Yewale …Respondent

Mr. Sanjay P Shinde, for the Petitioner.

Adv Ishita Shah, with Kiran Mohite, Deepika Mule & Kartik Malusare, i/b Kiran Mohite, for the Respondent.

CORAM: N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATE : 20^th NOVEMBER 2025

P.C.:

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

ARUN RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL

Digitally signed by ARUN RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL Date: 2025.11.27 18:43:41 +0530

The challenge in this Petition is to an order dated dated 20^th September 2025 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court, in Notice of Motion No. 2986 of 2024, thereby setting aside ex parte order and permitting the Respondent-Defendant to file the Written Statement, subject to payment of costs of Rs.3,000/-.

Having regard to the facts of the case, especially the dismissal of the Suit for want of prosecution and the Suit not being on the file of the Court for a considerable period, when this Court expressed its disinclination to entertain the Petition, the learned Counsel for the

(Corrected order as per order dated 27^th November 2025 ) 1/2

40-WP-14921-2025-MODIFIED.DOC

Petitioner submits that, the hearing of the Suit which was instituted in the year 1999, be expedited.

The submission, having regard to the date of the institution of the Suit, appears to be justifiable.

The learned Judge seized with Suit No.72 of 1999, is requested to hear and decide the Suit as expeditiously as possible and, preferably, within a period of nine months from the date of settlement of issues.

Petition disposed.

The parties shall not seek unnecessary adjournments.

[N. J. JAMADAR, J.]

(Corrected order as per order dated 27^th November 2025 ) 2/2