Vithu D. Redkar (Since Deceased) vs Suresh Arjun Bandekar and 18 Ors.

1(h) Mr. Pradesh Vithu Redkar. S/o Vithu Redkar, 38 years of age, service, All residents of H. No. 225 Bandekar Vaddo, Morjim, Goa. Versus 1. Mr. Suresh Arjun Bandekar son of Arjun Bandekar age 76 years, married, retired, R/o H. No. 178, Bandekar waddo, Pernem-Goa.

¶18

... Petitioners.

¶19

Mr. Gurudas Devidas Asgaonkar, son of Devidas Asgaonkar age 80 Years, married, retired R/o H.No.168, Bandekar waddo, Pernem, Goa.

¶20

Mr. Bhalchandra Narayan Bandekar. son of Narayan Bandekar, age 75 years, married, retired R/o H. No. 193-A Bandekarwada, Morjim, Pernem, Goa,

¶21

Mr. Vithal Mahadev Tiloji, son of Mahadev Tiloji, age 75 Years, married, unemployed R/o. Bandekar Waddo, Morjim, Pernem, Goa.

¶22

Mr. Anand R. Bandekar, son of Rajaram Bandekar age 59 years, married, service, R/o H. No. 176. Bandekar waddo,

¶23

Page 2 of 11 13^th August, 2025

¶24

37 WP 333-2025

¶25

Morjim, Pernem-Goa. 6. Mr. Sachidanand D. Asgaonkar, son of Dattaram Asgaonkar age 45 years, unmarried, service, R/o H. No. 168, Bandekar waddo, Morjim, Pernem-Goa.

¶26

Mr. Prasad Gangaram Pednekar, (Since Deceased), Through Legal heirs. 7(a). Smt. Laxmi Gangaram Pednekar (Since deceased) Through Legal heirs. 7(a)(i). Mr. Nilesh Gangaram Pednekar, Son of Gangaram Pednekar, age 50 years, unmarried, service, R/o. H.No.182, Bandekar Vaddo, Morjim, Pernem Goa 7(a)(ii). Ms. Chaya Gangaram Pednekar, D/o. Gangaram Pednekar, age 55 years, unmarried, unemployed R/o. H. No. 182, Bandekar Vaddo, Morjim, Pernem Goa.

¶27

7(a)(iii). Mrs. Shubhangi Prakash Govekar. W/o. Prakash Govekar age 45 years. married, housewife her husband.

¶28

7(a)(iv) . Mr. Prakash Govekar, son of Rajaram Govekar, age 50 Years, married,

¶29

37 WP 333-2025

¶30

Both R/o H.No.96, Raia, Siolim, Bardez Goa.

¶31

7(a)(v) Mrs. Manish Mangesh Bandekar, W/o. Mangesh Bandekar, age 65 years, married, housewife, And her husband,

¶32

7(a)(vi) Mr. Mangesh Bandekar, son of Gopal Bandekar age 73 years, service, Both R/o H.No.205, Bandekar Vaddo, Morjim, Pernem Goa.

¶33

7(a)(vii) Mr. Devidas Gangaram Pednekar, S/o. Gangaram Pednekar, age 62 years, married and his wife,

¶34

7(a) (viii) Mrs. Surangi Devidas Pednekar. W/o. Devidas Pednekar, age 60 years, housewife, Both r/o. H.No. 182 Bandekar vaddo, Morjim, Pernem Goa.

¶35

7(a)(ix). Mr. Krishna Gangaram Pedenkar, Son of Gangaram Pednekar, Age 64 Years, Married, service, R/o. H. No. 182 Bandekar Vaddo, Morjim, Pernem Goa.

¶36

Mr. Mukund Yeshwant Bandekar, Son of Yeshwant Bandekar age 60 Years, married, business, R/o H. No. 195, Bandekar Wada, Morjim, Pernem-Goa

¶37

Page 4 of 11 13^th August, 2025

¶38

37 WP 333-2025

¶39

Mr. Balkrishna Prabhakar Kambli (Since Deceased).

¶40

9(a). Mrs. Vandana Balkrishna Kambli, W/o. Balkrishna Prabhakar Kambli, age 45 years, married, housewife, R/o. H.No. 203, Bandekar Wada, Morjim, Pernem Goa

¶41

10.Mr. Mahadev Nana Bandekar, s/o Nana Bandekar, age 65 years, business, married, R/o H.No.205, Bandekar Wada, Morjim, Pernem-Goa.

¶42

11.Mr. Prakash Kashinath Bandekar. s/o Kashinath Bandekar, age 65 years, service, married, R/o H.No. 175, Bandekar Wada, Morjim, Pernem-Goa,

¶43

Mr. Ashok Uttam Bandekar. (Since deceased).

¶44

12(a). Mrs. Anita Ashok Bandekar. w/o Ashok Bandekar, age 58 Years.

¶45

12(b). Mr. Shubham Ashok Bandekar. S/o Ashok Bandekar, age 27 Years, service,

¶46

12(c). Mr. Akshay Ashok Bandekar, s/o Ashok Bandekar age 24 Years, service, All r/o H.No. 187/A, Bandekarwadda, Morjim, Pernem Goa.

¶47

Page 5 of 11 13^th August, 2025

¶48

37 WP 333-2025

¶49

13.Mrs. Rukmini V. Redkar, w/o Vithu Redkar, age about 75 years, R/o. H.No.225, Bandekar Vaddo, Morjim, Goa 14. Mr. Krishna D. Redkar (Since Deceased) Major of age Through legal Heirs (a) Mrs. Urmila Laxman Gadekar, Mayor of age (b) Mr. Laxman Arjun Gadekar, major of age Both r/o. Belabai, Vasco, Goa. (c) Mrs. Shivani Shivanand Naik, Major of age (d) Mr. Prakash Krishna Redkar, Major of age (e) Mrs. Priya Prakash Redkar, Major of age R/o. Bandekar Wada, Morjim, Pernem, Goa. (f) Mrs. Geeta Gurudas Mandrekar, Major of age (g) Mr. Gurudas Guna Mandrekar, Major of age Both r/o. Caisuva, Anjuna, Bardez, Goa. (h) Mr. Laxmikant Krishna Redkar, Major of age

¶50

37 WP 333-2025

¶51

R/o. Morjim, Pernem, Goa.

¶52

Mr. Rama Babani Tandel (Since deceased). (a). Mrs. Radhika Rama Tandel, W/o. Rama Tandel, age 60 years, housewife,

¶53

(b). Mrs. Jayashree Rama Tandel, D/o. Rama Tandel, age 45 years married, housewife,

¶54

(c) Mrs. Rupali Rama Tandel. D/o. Rama Tandel. 40 years of age, married, housewife,

¶55

(d). Mrs. Roshani Rama Tandel, D/o. Rama Tandel, 38 years of age, married, housewife,

¶56

(e). Mrs. Rakshita Rama Tandel. D/o. Rama Tandel, 35 years of age, married, housewife,

¶57

(f). Mrs. Ratisha Rama Tandel, D/o. Rama Tandel, 32 years of age, married, housewife. All R/o. House No. 173, Bandekarwada, Morjim, Pernem Goa,

¶58

Mr. Bablo Laxman Wadji (Since deceased). (a) Mr. Vinayak Bablo Wadji. son of Bablo Wadji, age 60 Years, married, business, Married to

Page 7 of 11

13^th August, 2025

37 WP 333-2025

Mrs. Vidhya V. Wadji,

¶63

(b) Mr. Prakash Bablo Vadji, son of Bablo Vadji age 65 Years, married to Mrs. Pratima P. Wadji.

¶64

(c) Mr. Kalidas Bablo Wadji. son of Bablo Wadji, age 60 years, service, Married to Mrs. Smita K. Wadji,

¶65

(d) Mrs. Praful Prabhakar Shirodkar, w/o Prabhakar Shiodkar, age 50 years, married, housewife,

¶66

(c) Mrs. Sugandi Vithal Vengurlekar, W/o Vithal Vengurlekar age 45 years, married housewife,

¶67

(f) Mrs. Shobha Sainath Zalmi, W/o Sainath Zalmi age 42 years, married, housewife,

¶68

(g) Mrs. Chandralekha Ashok Naik, W/o Ashok Naik. age 42 years, married, housewife, All r/o H. No. 137. Naroji Wada, Morjim, Pernem-Goa

¶69

17.Mr. Mangesh Namdev Taral. son of Namdev Taral. age 59 years, married, service R/o H. No.201, Bandekar waddo, Morjim, Pernem-Goa.

¶70

18.Mr. Sitaram Jaganath Bandekar, son of Jaganath Bandekar.

¶71

Page 8 of 11 13^th August, 2025

¶72

37 WP 333-2025

¶73

age 50 years, married, service, R/o H. No. 174 Bandekar waddo, Morjim, Pernem-Goa.

¶74

19.Mr. Hari Sada Naik, son of Sada Naik, age 65 years, retired, R/o H.No. 162 Bandekarwadda, Morjim, Pernem, Goa. ... Respondents.

¶75

Mr. Manoj Jalmi, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. K.T. Sawant, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1, 3, 5 to 8 and 12.

¶76

CORAM: VALMIKI MENEZES, J. DATED: 13^th August, 2025

¶77

ORAL JUDGMENT:

¶78

1. Registry to waive office objections and register the matter.

¶79

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, petition is disposed of finally.

¶80

3. The challenge in this petition is to an order dated 03.06.2025 of the Court of the Additional District Judge-3, North Goa passed in RCA No. 76/2024. By the impugned order, the District Court has rejected the application filed by the Original Respondent Nos.1(a) to 1(h)/Petitioners herein i.e. Plaintiffs in the original suit bearing RCS No.17/2011, seeking enlargement of time under Section 151 CPC to carry out amendment to the cause title of the original plaint. The suit was partly decreed against which the present Respondent Nos.1 to 12

Page 9 of 11

13^th August, 2025

37 WP 333-2025

have filed an appeal. From the record, it appears that by an order of 09.05.2025, the District Court had condoned delay on an application filed by the said original Respondent Nos.1(a) to 1(h) for carrying out amendment to the cause title in the plaint, and to correct the record in the plaint to enter the names of legal representatives of original Respondent No.3/original Plaintiff No.3. Time of 10 days was granted to carry out amendment to the cause title.

¶85

4. In the aforementioned order, the District Court makes reference to a Judgment of this Court in Rukmini Dattatreya Naik vs. Parmanand Lalchand Joshi reported in (2000) 4 ALL MR 758 Bom , wherein it has been held that an amendment to the cause title is not an amendment to the pleadings, and such amendment may be carried out either by any of the parties or by the Court establishment on its own. This being the situation, the Registry of the Civil Court dealing with the suit would have carried out the amendment on its own.

¶86

5. Since the time limit was set down in the order of 09.05.2025, the Petitioners filed an application at Exhibit D-16 seeking extension of enlargement of time granted by the District Court to carry out the aforementioned amendment to the cause title of the plaint, which came to be rejected only on the count that an affidavit was not filed by the learned Advocate for the party who moved the application to substantiate the allegation that the concerned file had not been given to the Advocate for carrying out the amendment. This, in my opinion,

Page 10 of 11

13^th August, 2025

37 WP 333-2025

may not be sufficient ground to reject such an application, in the light of the law laid down by this Court, to the effect that amendment to the cause title could well be carried out by the Registries of the Courts themselves. These are ministerial acts and parties need not be saddled with filing of applications to enlarge time on such grounds.

¶91

6. Consequently, the impugned order is quashed and set aside. The learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioners submits that he will carry out the amendment to the cause title of the original plaint filed in RCS No. 17/2011 within a period of 15 days from today. It is reported that the Records and Proceedings of RCS No. 17/2011 have now been called for and are in possession of the Registry of District Judge-3. The dealing hand of the Registry of District Judge-3 shall provide the concerned file of RCS No. 17/2011 to the Advocate for the Petitioner who shall effect the amendment within the timeline set up above. Considering the fact that notice had to be issued to the Respondents in this matter, and there is some amount of negligence on the part of the Petitioner in carrying out the amendment on their own, costs of Rs.10,000/- are awarded to the Appellants before the District Court. Costs may be deposited in the Registry of the District Court within 15 days from today and may be released by the learned District Judge to the Appellants under its orders.

¶92

7. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.

¶93

VALMIKI MENEZES, J.

¶94

Page 11 of 11

¶95

13^th August, 2025

¶96

Signed by: JOSE FRANCISCO DSOUZA Designation: Personal Assistant Date: 14/08/2025 17:52:53

Vithu D. Redkar (Since Deceased) v. Suresh Arjun Bandekar and 18 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vithu D. Redkar (Since Deceased) v. Suresh Arjun Bandekar and 18 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ajju C.S., Managing Director Ajjus Group of Companies Vs Mahesh Parab

Communidade of Assagao, Rep. by Its Attorney Nelson J. Fernandes Vs State of Goa, Thr. the Police Inspector, Mapusa Police Station and Anr.

Rosita Fernandes Vs State Thr. Public Prosecutor and Anr.

Rajbi Nadaf and Anr. Vs Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation and Anr.

Anandakumar Locximidass Colopo Alias Anandkumar Laxmidas Khalap and 2 Ors. Vs M/S. Gkb Optolab Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by Its Director Neeraj Gupta and Anr.

Alex Sabastian Paul Fernandes Alias Alexio Sabestiao Paulo Fernandes and Anr. Vs State of Goa, Thr. the Chief Secredtary and 4 Ors.