Bombay High Court

RAMLAL KESHARCHAND LODHA DIED THR HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE PUSHPAWATI AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SECRETARY AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The court recalled the dismissal and restored the writ petition, ordering costs to the respondents.

Summary

The petitioners, representing the estate of the deceased Ramlal Kesharchand Lodha, sought restoration of their writ petition after a conditional order dated 28.04.2026 dismissed it for failure to serve respondents 5‑7 within four weeks. They argued that the failure was due to an incorrect address, not intentional, and that they were unaware of the dismissal. The court examined whether a dismissal for non‑service could be set aside when the defect was inadvertent. It held that the dismissal could be recalled and the writ petition restored, subject to costs payable to the affected respondents. Consequently, the interim relief granted on 02.07.2025 was also reinstated pending further hearing, and the writ petition was listed for 06.10.2026.

Issues considered

What is the effect of a dismissal of a writ petition for failure of service when the failure is inadvertent?
Can the court recall its own dismissal order and restore the writ petition?

Subjects

writ petition
service of process
dismissal
restoration
interim relief
civil application
procedural law

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:42274


                                                  1                        961...odt


                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                           CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10331 OF 2026
                                     IN WP/7767/2025

                RAMLAL KESHARCHAND LODHA DIED THR HIS LEGAL
                     REPRESENTATIVE PUSHPAWATI AND OTHERS
                                         VERSUS
              THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SECRETARY AND OTHERS
                                             ...
                       Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Sachin Bhalerao
                                   h/f. Mr. Kale Ajeet B.
                     AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 : Ms. Preeti Diggikar
                      Advocate for Respondent No. 4 : Mr. S.S. Dange
                     Advocate for Respondent Nos. 5 to 7 : Mr. I.K. Wagh
                                             …

                                       CORAM : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.

                                       DATE       : 11th SEPTEMBER, 2026

              PER COURT :

              1.          The Petitioners are seeking restoration of the Writ Petition

              by recalling the order passed by this Court on 28.04.2026.


              2.          According to the Applicants, a conditional order came to be

              passed by this Court on 28.04.2026, granting a period of four weeks to

              take steps, failing which, the Petition shall stand dismissed without

              further reference to the Court. It is submitted that pursuant to the

              conditional order passed by this Court on 28.04.2026, the Applicants

              have supplied copies diligently for effecting service on the Respondents.
                                       2                          961...odt


The Applicants submit that later the Applicants were informed that the

copies supplied by the Applicants were not received by Respondent nos.

5 to 7, as they were not residing on the given address as mentioned in the

bailiff report.


3.            It is submitted that failure of service upon Respondent nos. 5

to 7, was neither intentional nor deliberate. Therefore, the Applicants

were completely unaware about the dismissal of the Writ Petition. The

Applicants undertake to supply the correct address of Respondent nos. 5

to 7, forthwith to take necessary steps for service on these Respondents.


4.            The prayer of the Petitioners is opposed by the learned

Advocate appearing for Respondent nos. 5 to 7, who opposes the Writ

Petition.


5.            Considering the valuable rights of the Petitioners involved in

the Writ Petition, the order of dismissal passed by this Court on

28.04.2026, is recalled. The Writ Petition is restored to its file.


6.            In view of the aforementioned statements made in the

Application, the Civil Application deserves to be allowed, subject to

payment of costs of Rs. 10,000/- to the Respondents nos. 5 to 7, to be

paid within the period of two weeks.
                                     3                         961...odt


7.           As a result of restoration of Writ Petition, the interim relief

granted by this Court vide order dated 02.07.2025, is also restored till the

listing of the Writ Petition.


8.           List the Writ Petition on 06.10.2026.




                                     ( MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. )




SPC

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…