Disposed¶25

Gitadevi Ramprakash Podar v. Pragnesh Narayan Podar

Bombay HC9 Jan 2026APP/76/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gitadevi Ramprakash Podar v. Pragnesh Narayant Podar and Ors.; Appeal No. 76 of 2024 in Misc. Petition (L) No. 24140 of 2023; Bombay High Court OOCJ; heirship certificate revocation refused by Single Judge 12-02-2024; interim adjournment to 23-01-2026; refusal of further time; warning of dismissal with heavy costs; no final disposition, no statutes or precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Interim order only: matter stood over to 23rd January 2026 for hearing on merits; no final relief granted or denied; Court cautioned it may dismiss the Appeal with heavy costs if no merit is found after hearing. ¶25

Gitadevi Ramprakash Podar vs Pragnesh Narayan Podar — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the Appellant is entitled to revocation of the heirship certificate granted to Respondent No.1 — the point settled by the learned Single Judge's dismissal of Misc. Petition (L) No. 24140 of 2023 and now challenged through this Appeal. +1 more

¶14

Ratio / Principle

Acceding to the request of the Advocate appearing for the Appellant (who had recently come on record and sought time to address the Court on merits), the Court placed the matter on 23rd January 2026.

¶20

Key takeaways

Having gone through the impugned order, the Bench stated that at least prima facie it does not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge; the point was expressly left open for a fuller hearing fixed on 23rd January 2026.obiter¶19
The Court declined to grant any more time beyond 23rd January 2026 because, when the matter was on board the previous week, the learned Advocate for the Appellant did not appear.ratio¶20
The Court made it clear to the Advocate for the Appellant that, after hearing the Appeal, if no merit is found, the Appeal may be dismissed with heavy costs imposed on the Appellant (conditional caution; final decision deferred).

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (OOCJ), Coram B. P. Colabawalla & Firdosh P. Pooniwalla, JJ., order dated 16 January 2026: Appeal No. 76 of 2024 by Gitadevi Ramprakash Podar challenging the dismissal (by the learned Single Judge on 12th February 2024) of Misc. Petition (L) No. 24140 of 2023, in which the Appellant was held not entitled to revocation of the heirship certificate granted to Respondent No.1 (Pragnesh Narayant Podar and Ors.), chiefly because the 1st Respondent's heirship status was never disputed and the certificate does not decide title disputes. Interim order only: the Bench, having gone through the impugned order, stated that at least prima facie it found no reason to interfere; acceding to the request of the Appellant's newly-on-record counsel, it adjourned the matter to 23rd January 2026, refused any further time (counsel absent when the matter was last on board), and cautioned that if no merit is found after hearing, the Appeal may be dismissed with heavy costs on the Appellant. Appeal not finally disposed; no statute or precedent cited.

¶1

8-APP-76-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

APPEAL NO. 76 OF 2024 IN MISC. PETITION (L) NO. 24140 OF 2023

¶4

Gitadevi Ramprakash Podar

¶5

.. Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Pragnesh Narayant Podar and Ors.

¶8

.. Respondents

¶9

Adv. Rajani Yadav , i/b Adv. Durgaprasad Sabnis, for the Appellant .

¶10

Adv. Karl Tamboly , a/w Adv. Sonali Aggarwal, i/b M/s. Dhruve Liladhar & Co. for the Respondents.

¶11

CORAM: B. P. COLABAWALLA &

¶12

FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ. DATE: JANUARY 16, 2026

¶13

P. C.

¶14

1. The above Appeal challenges the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 12th February 2024. By the impugned order, Miscellaneous Petition (L) No. 24140 of 2023 filed by the Appellant was dismissed by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge, in effect inter alia held that the Appellant is not entitled to revocation of the heirship certificate granted to Respondent No.1 primarily on the ground that the status of 1st Respondent’s heirship was never disputed and is still not

¶15

Page 1 of 3 JANUARY 16, 2026

¶16

Darshan Patil

¶17

8-APP-76-2024.doc

¶18

disputed by the Appellant. The learned Single Judge also held that granting heirship certificate to the 1st Respondent does not in any way decide the title disputes. The learned Single Judge therefore proceeded to dismiss the aforesaid Petition.

¶19

2. We have gone through the impugned order. At least prima facie , we do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

¶20

3. Be that as it may, the learned Advocate appearing for the Appellant submitted that they have recently come on record and require time to address the Court on merits. Acceding to the request of the Advocate appearing for the Appellant, we place the above matter on 23rd January 2026. We are not inclined to grant any more time for the simple reason that when the above matter was on board last week, the learned Advocate for the Appellant did not even bother to appear in the above matter.

¶21

4. We also make it clear to the Advocate for the Appellant that after hearing the Appellant in the above Appeal, if we find no merit, we may dismiss the above Appeal by imposing heavy costs on Appellant.

¶22

Page 2 of 3 JANUARY 16, 2026

¶23

Darshan Patil

¶24

8-APP-76-2024.doc

¶25

5. Stand over to 23rd January 2026.

¶26

6. This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary/ Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax or email of a digitally signed copy of this order.

¶27

[FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J.] [B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.]

¶28

Page 3 of 3 JANUARY 16, 2026

¶29

Darshan Patil

¶30

Signed by: Darshan Patil Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 17/01/2026 12:57:45

Gitadevi Ramprakash Podar v. Pragnesh Narayan Podar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gitadevi Ramprakash Podar v. Pragnesh Narayan Podar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mahindra United World College of India (Muwci) vs State of Maharashtra Thr Its Prin. Secretary, Revenue and Forest Dept. and Ors.

Kamal Naseem Shaikh vs Maharashtra Electricity Regultory Commission and Anr.

Century Rayon vs The Union of India

Satish Surappa Poojari, vs Lata Rajesh Shetty Alias Latha Rajesh Shetty

Nimish Vasant Hakani through Poa Swati Nimish Hakani and Anr. vs Jatin Ramesh Diwan and 3 Ors.

Royal Cushion Vinyl Products Ltd. vs Ing Deutschland GmbH