Bombay High Court

AJITKUMAR PATILSAHEB DENGALEversusBHAGWAT CHANDRBHAN DHOKCHOULE AND ORS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court condoned the delay and allowed the civil application, holding that the applicant’s non‑compliance was not deliberate.

Summary

The applicant filed a writ petition which the High Court dismissed for want of prosecution because he failed to supply spare copies for notice within the time prescribed, as ordered on 27 July 2026. The applicant subsequently filed a civil application 38 days after the dismissal, claiming that his failure to comply with the court’s conditional order was unintentional and due to his inability to take note of the earlier order. He argued that the delay and non‑compliance were not deliberate. The Court considered the applicant’s explanation and, finding no mala fide intent, exercised its discretion to condone the delay. Consequently, the Court allowed the civil application in accordance with prayer clauses B and C. The decision effectively reinstated the relief sought by the applicant despite the procedural lapses.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate judicial discretion when a party files a civil application after a dismissal for want of prosecution due to procedural default?
Can a delay of 38 days in filing a remedial application be condoned when the non‑compliance is claimed to be unintentional?

Subjects

writ petition
want of prosecution
procedural default
condonation of delay
civil application
High Court of Bombay
judicial discretion

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:44099
                                                1                   920-CA.11017-26.odt


                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                              920 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11017 OF 2026
                                          IN WP/6474/2026

                               AJITKUMAR PATILSAHEB DENGALE
                                          VERSUS
                          BHAGWAT CHANDRBHAN DHOKCHOULE AND ORS

                                                  ...
                              Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Chormal Ajit B.
                              AGP for Respondent/s-State : Mr. K. S. Patil.
                                                  ...

                                           CORAM : MANJUSHA A. DESHPANDE, J.
                                           DATE : 24.09.2026

                     PER COURT :-


                     1.    Writ Petition filed by the applicant was dismissed for

                     want of prosecution due to failure to supply spare copies for

                     issuance of notice within the stipulated period vide order dated

                     27.07.2026. There is a delay of 38 days in filing the present

                     application.


                     2.    The applicant has stated that, due to failure of applicant,

                     he could not take note of the order passed by this Court and

                     consequently, could not comply with the conditional order

                     passed by this Court within the stipulated period. According to

                     him, non-compliance is neither deliberate nor intentional.
                            2                  920-CA.11017-26.odt


3.      In view of the statement made in the application, civil

application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses “B and C”.




                                (MANJUSHA A. DESHPANDE, J.)

                                 ...

vmk/-

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…