Disposed¶16

Kailashprasad S Malpani v. Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation

Bombay HC6 Feb 2026WP/783/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court common order 06.02.2026; paucity of time; office objections removed within two weeks; ad-interim interim orders continue; affidavit in reply/rejoinder one week before next date; spare copies non-supply; Petitioner supply spare copies 14 days; dismissal against unserved Respondents on 15th day; notice returnable after four weeks; listing chart 16.02.2026-13.03.2026; Compliance; Supreme Court Expedited Matter; Fresh Admission; Urgent Admission; Urgent Order; Due Admission; RAVINDRA V. GHUGE; ABHAY J. MANTRI; Sufiyan Syed PA.

What did the court decide?

Continuation of ad-interim/interim orders granted earlier, subject to removal of office objections within two weeks; deferred matters relisted on specified dates between 16.02.2026 and 13.03.2026. ¶16

Kailashprasad S Malpani vs Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Continuation of ad-interim/interim orders granted earlier, subject to removal of office objections within two weeks; deferred matters relisted on specified dates between 16.02.2026 and 13.03.2026.

¶16

Issue for consideration

How are matters that could not be taken up for hearing at the time of rising due to paucity of time to be scheduled? +5 more

¶7

Court's answer

Subject to the above conditions, the deferred matters were listed for future dates ranging from 16.02.2026 to 13.03.2026 in categories including Compliance, Supreme Court Expedited Matter, Direction, Fresh Admission, Urgent Admission, Urgent Order and Due Admission.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

All office objections in these matters shall be removed within two weeks.

¶8

Key takeaways

Subject to compliance with the above, ad-interim/interim orders, if any granted earlier, would continue.ratio¶9
The affidavit in reply/rejoinder, if any, shall be filed at least one week before the next date.ratio¶10
Matters in which service of notice is awaited are to be put up after service.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Common administrative order dated 06.02.2026 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.), issued because the listed matters could not be taken up for hearing at the time of rising due to paucity of time. Directions given: all office objections to be removed within two weeks; ad-interim/interim orders granted earlier to continue subject to such compliance; affidavit in reply/rejoinder, if any, at least one week before the next date; matters awaiting service of notice to be put up after service; where notices could not be processed for non-supply of spare copies, the Petitioner to supply spare copies within 14 days, failing which the matters would stand dismissed as against the unserved Respondents on the 15th day, and if copies are supplied notice to issue returnable after four weeks. By the chart at paragraph No. 7 the matters were relisted between 16.02.2026 and 13.03.2026 under categories Compliance, Supreme Court Expedited Matter, Direction, Fresh Admission, Urgent Admission, Urgent Order and Due Admission. The order cites no statute, precedent or substantive legal issue.

¶1

Common Order 06.02.2026.odt

¶2

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

¶3

Digitally signed by VINA VINA ARVIND ARVIND KHADPE KHADPE Date: 2026.02.09 17:02:30 +0530

¶4

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.

¶5

DATE : 06^th FEBRUARY, 2026.

¶6

P.C. :-

¶7

At the time of rising, the matters mentioned in the chart in paragraph No. 7 hereunder, could not be taken up for hearing due to paucity of time.

¶8

In several of these matters, there are office objections. As such, all office objections shall be removed within two weeks.

¶9

Subject to compliance of the above, ad-interim/ interim order, if any granted earlier, would continue.

¶10

The affidavit in reply/rejoinder, if any, shall also be filed at least one week before the next date.

¶11

Matters in which service of notice is awaited, put up after service.

¶12

Matters in which though notices were issued, the office could not process the notice due to non-supply of spare copies, the Petitioner shall supply spare copies for issuance of notice within 14 days, failing which, the matters in which copies are not supplied, would stand dismissed as against the unserved Respondents on the 15^th day. If copies are supplied, office to issue notice to the unserved Respondents, returnable after four weeks.

¶13

Sufiyan Syed - PA

¶14

1 of 2

¶15

Common Order 06.02.2026.odt

¶16

7. Subject to the above, list these matters as under :-

¶17

Serial Nos. of matters on the Board	To be listed on	To be listed in the category
01 to 02	16.02.2026	For Compliance
03	23.02.2026	Supreme Court Expedited Matter
05 to 06	24.02.2026	For Direction
07 to 08	09.03.2026	Fresh Admission
10 to 20	09.03.2026	Fresh Admission
21 to 30	09.03.2026	Fresh Admission
32 to 41	10.03.2026	Fresh Admission
43 to 46	10.03.2026	Fresh Admission
47	11.03.2026	For Admission
49 to 52	11.03.2026	For Admission
54 to 56	11.03.2026	Urgent Admission
57 to 59	11.03.2026	Urgent Order
60	12.03.2026	Urgent Order
61 to 64	12.03.2026	Urgent Order
67 to 77	12.03.2026	Urgent Order
78 to 98	13.03.2026	Due Admission

¶18

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

¶19

Sufiyan Syed - PA

¶20

2 of 2

Kailashprasad S Malpani v. Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kailashprasad S Malpani v. Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Yashoda Majoor Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit Thro. Its Authorized Signatory vs the State of Maharashtra Thro. Ministry of Co-Operation

Hariprasad Jain and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra Throu. Dept of Co-Opearation Marketing and Textiles and Ors.

Prasad Majoor Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit (Proposed) vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Ministry of Co-Operation and Ors.

Vilas Bajirao Phand vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Vivek Madhukar Raote vs Shri Bhulingeshwar Dewalaya Trust

Vishal Arun Alzende vs State of Maharashtra