Allowed

P. Raghothamam Nayakar v. M/S. G.S. Construction Co. and Ors.

Bombay HC4 Mar 2026APEAL/341/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court permitted the withdrawal of three criminal appeals with liberty to file them before the Sessions Court. The court mandated that any new filings be made within eight weeks, with the pendency period before this court eligible for exclusion in limitation calculations.

What did the court decide?

The three appeals were permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file before the Sessions Court within eight weeks.

P. Raghothamam Nayakar Vs M/S. G.S… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2026)

¶1

Mamta Kale

¶2

26-apeal-342-2006.docx

¶3

MAMTA AMAR KALE

¶4

Digitally signed byMAMTA AMAR KALE Date: 2026.03.0417:54:20 +0530

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶6

Criminal Appeal No. 342 of 2006

¶7

with

¶8

Criminal Appeal No. 341 of 2006

¶9

with

¶10

Criminal Appeal No. 343 of 2006

¶11

P Raghothaman Nayakar

¶12

… Appellant

¶13

versus

¶14

M/s G S Construction Co. and Ors. … Respondents

¶15

Mr Makarand Shinde a/w Mr Gaurav Pande, for the Appellant. Mr Gautam Modanwal i/b T J Pandian, for Respondents No.1 and 2.

¶16

Mr Arfan Sait, APP, for the Respondent / State.

¶17

Coram: R.N. Laddha, J. Date: 4 March 2026

¶18

P.C.:

¶19

. The learned Counsel for the appellant, on instructions, seeks leave to withdraw these three appeals with liberty to file the appeals before the learned Sessions Court, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Celestium Financial vs A Gnanasekaran, 2025 SCC OnLine 1320.

¶20

In view of the aforesaid submissions, the appeals are

Page 1 of 2

4 March 2026

Mamta Kale

26-apeal-342-2006.docx

¶25

permitted to be withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty and stand disposed of accordingly.

¶26

In the event such appeals are filed, the Sessions Court shall consider the question of limitation, bearing in mind that the present appeals were pending before this Court. Any such appeals shall be filed within a period of eight weeks from today. The appellant shall be entitled to seek exclusion of the period during which the present appeals remained pending before this Court, for the purpose of condonation of delay before the Sessions Court. The Sessions Court shall consider the question of delay in that context. The learned Counsel for the appellant is permitted to apply for the return of a certified copy of the impugned judgment and order for the purpose of filing the appeals before the Sessions Court, upon producing a photocopy thereof. The Registry shall verify the photocopy and, upon due verification, return the certified copy to the learned Counsel for the appellant.

¶27

Page 2 of 2

¶28

4 March 2026

P. Raghothamam Nayakar v. M/S. G.S. Construction Co. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P. Raghothamam Nayakar v. M/S. G.S. Construction Co. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhagvan Anant Kaskar vs the State of Maharashtra

Aryan Dharmendra Shah vs the State of Maharashtra

Preeti Dharampal Lanjewar vs State of Maharashtra

P. Raghothaman Nayakar Vs M/S. G.S. Construction Co. and Ors.

P. Raghothaman Nayakar Vs M/S G.S. Construction Co. and Ors.

Prashant Praveen Jain Vs M/S. Pacific Infotech Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.