Bombay High Court

Tulsiram so Manik WaghmareversusSayyed Chandsaab Sayyed Mehboob Deceased thr LRs Khairuna Sayyed Chand and ors

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court allowed the amendment, granted condonation of delay, dismissed the unmaintainable application, and held the injunction application infructuous, ordering notice to the proposed respondent No.3.

Summary

The High Court considered four civil applications filed by the petitioner, Tulsiram Manik Waghmare. It allowed the amendment to add a subsequent purchaser to the second appeal and granted condonation of a 100‑day delay in filing that appeal. The court dismissed an application as unmaintainable because no decree had been passed against the petitioner. A request for a temporary injunction to restrain alienation of agricultural land was held infructuous after the property was transferred to a proposed respondent, and the court ordered notice to be issued to that respondent. Notices to other respondents were deemed unnecessary as they had already been served or waived.

Issues considered

Whether the amendment to add a subsequent purchaser in the second appeal can be permitted
Whether a 100‑day delay in filing the second appeal can be condoned
Whether an application is maintainable when no decree has been passed against the applicant
Whether a temporary injunction can be granted to restrain alienation of the suit property
Whether the injunction application becomes infructuous upon transfer of the property to a proposed respondent

Subjects

civil procedure
amendment
condonation of delay
temporary injunction
maintainability
notice
subsequent purchaser

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:39749


                                                                               ca9392.26
                                                  -1-


                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                             51 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9392 OF 2026
                                        IN SAST/6649/2025
                                              WITH
                              CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2845 OF 2025
                                              WITH
                             CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12422 OF 2025
                                              WITH
                              CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2846 OF 2025

                                     Tulsiram Manik Waghmare
                                               VERSUS
                 Sayyed Chandsaab Sayyed Mehboob Died Through Lrs And Another
                                                   ...
                 Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Sachin G. Joshi
                 Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Ms. Priyanka Sarnaik h/f Mr.
                 Uddhav L. Momale
                                                  …..

                                     CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
                                     DATED : 31st AUGUST, 2026

                 PER COURT :-


                 1.       The civil application No. 9392 of 2026 is filed for adding the

                 subsequent purchaser of the suit property in the second appeal.

                 Perused the application. Heard learned advocates of both sides. For

                 the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed.

                 Amendment be carried out within two weeks from today. After the

                 amendment is carried, issue notice to the proposed respondent No.3,

                 returnable on 12.10.2026.



                 2.       The civil application No. 2845 of 2025 is filed for
                                                                 ca9392.26
                                   -2-

condonation of delay of 100 days caused in filing the second appeal.

Perused the application. Heard learned advocates for both sides. For

the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed and

disposed of.



3.        In so far as civil application No. 2846 of 2025 is concerned,

no any decree is passed against the applicant.           The application

therefore, is not maintainable and is disposed of accordingly.



4.        The civil application No. 12422 of 2025 is filed for grant of

temporary injunction by way of prayer clause “B” which reads as

under:-



          “B.       That, the respondent No.2 or his agent/
          servant/representative or any GPA holder may kindly
          be injuncted by way of appropriate order from
          alienation of the suit property i.e. agriculture land of
          Sy. No.14/2 admeasuring 6 Acre 25 Gunthas situated
          at village Haibatpur, Tq. Udgir, District Latur.”



5.        Now the suit property, involved in the matter, is transferred

to the proposed respondent No.3.             The application therefore,

becomes infructuous and it is disposed of.



6.        In second appeal, issue notice to the respondents,
                                                         ca9392.26
                                  -3-

returnable on 12.10.2026.



7.        Ms. Sarnaik, learned advocate h/f Mr. Momale, learned

advocate, waives notice for respondent No. 2. Respondent Nos. 1-A

and 1-B are already served by way of paper publication. Therefore,

it is not necessary to issue notices to them.



                                   (SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.)

rlj/

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…