Bombay High Court
SHRI DIGAMBAR VITHOBA KAMBLE AND ANRversusSHRI BAPU SADHU KAMBLE AND ORS
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SANDESH D PATIL
Holding
The appeal from the order is dismissed, and the order remains in force.
Summary
The appellants challenged a judgment dated 14 August 2015 of the District Judge, Sangli, which had rejected their application for a stay in Regular Civil Appeal No. 59 of 2014. The order had been in force for more than eleven years without any further hearing. The High Court examined whether it was appropriate to disturb an order that had been operative for such a long period. It held that there was no justification to interfere with the order after the lapse of time. Consequently, the appeal from the order was dismissed and the district judge was directed to dispose of the pending civil appeal within one year.
Issues considered
- Whether an order that has been operative for over eleven years can be set aside on appeal
- Whether the High Court should intervene to expedite the disposal of the pending civil appeal
Subjects
- appeal from order
- delay in justice
- expeditious disposal
- civil procedure
- stay application
Judgment
907-AO-99-2016 (C).doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 99 OF 2016
Shri Digambar Vithoba Kamble & Anr. …...Appellants
VERSUS
Shri Bapu Sadhu Kamble & Ors. …...Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION IN AO NO. 134 OF 2016
IN
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 99 OF 2016
Shri Digambar Vithoba Kamble & Anr. …...Appellants
VERSUS
Shri Bapu Sadhu Kamble & Ors. …...Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION IN AO NO. 616 OF 2017
IN
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 99 OF 2016
Shri Digambar Vithoba Kamble & Anr. …...Appellants
VERSUS
Shri Bapu Sadhu Kamble & Ors. …...Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION IN AO NO. 1322 OF 2016
IN
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 99 OF 2016
Shri Digambar Vithoba Kamble & Anr. …...Appellants
VERSUS
Shri Bapu Sadhu Kamble & Ors. …...Respondents
...
Digitally
signed by
Mr. S. A. Rajeshirke a/w Adv. S. R. Vasekar for Appellants.
TALLE
TALLE SHUBHAM
SHUBHAM ASHOKRAO
None for the Respondents.
ASHOKRAO Date:
2026.06.15
10:24:19
...
+0530
Shubham 1/3
907-AO-99-2016 (C).doc
CORAM: SANDESH D. PATIL, J.
DATED: 12th JUNE 2026
P.C.:-
1. The present Appeal From Order is directed against the
judgment and order dated 14th August 2015 passed by the learned
District Judge, Sangli, whereby the application filed by the Appellant
seeking stay was rejected in Regular Civil Appeal No. 59 of 2014.
2. The impugned order has been in operation since 14th August
2015. Thus, it has remained operative for more than eleven years. In
the circumstances, there is no reason to interfere with the said order
after such a long lapse of time. The interests of justice would be
better served by directing the expeditious disposal of Regular Civil
Appeal No. 59 of 2014. Hence, the following order:
::ORDER::
a) The Appeal From Order is dismissed.
b) The learned District Judge-6, Sangli, is requested to
decide Regular Civil Appeal No. 59 of 2014 as expeditiously as
possible. Since the matter has been pending for the last eleven
years, the learned District Judge is requested to dispose of the
same within a period of one year from today.
Shubham 2/3
907-AO-99-2016 (C).doc
3. The Appeal From Order stands disposed of accordingly.
4. In view of the disposal of the Appeal From Order, all pending
applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.)
Shubham 3/3
Checking your session…