Bombay High Court
ISHWAR VITHALRAO PINALWAR AND ANOTHERversusJYOTI DWARKADAS RATHI AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The court condoned the delay, recalled the registrar’s order dated 17‑02‑2014, and restored the writ petition to its original position.
Summary
The applicants filed a civil application seeking to recall the Registrar (Judicial)'s order dated 17‑02‑2014 that refused registration of their writ petition because of an unremoved office objection. The writ petition challenged a 10‑07‑2013 judgment of the Maharashtra Co‑operative Appellate Court which had upheld a 30‑04‑2012 order of the Co‑operative Court of Nanded. Due to inadvertent oversight, the office objection was not removed, leading to the registrar’s refusal, which the applicants were unaware of; their former advocate died in 2017 and one applicant died in 2022. The court considered the peculiar circumstances and, in the interest of justice, condoned the delay, recalled the registrar’s order, and restored the writ petition to its original position. The application was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the delay in filing the civil application for condonation and setting aside the registrar's order can be condoned.
- Whether the registrar's order refusing registration of the writ petition on account of non‑removal of the office objection can be recalled.
Subjects
- civil procedure
- condonation of delay
- registration of writ petition
- office objection
- recall of order
- High Court
- justice
Judgment
1 93-CA-7763-26.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7763 OF 2026 IN RC/316/2014
ISHWAR VITHALRAO PINALWAR AND ANOTHER
VERSUS
JYOTI DWARKADAS RATHI AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for Applicants : Mr. P. P. More
...
CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : 10-09-2026
PER COURT:-
1. The applicants seek the recalling of the order dated
17.02.2014 rendered by the Registrar (Judicial), refusing the
registration of the writ petition on account of non-removal of the
office objection.
2. The underlying writ petition challenges the judgment dated
10.07.2013 rendered by the Maharashtra Co-operative Appellate
Court (Mumbai Bench at Aurangabad), which dismissed the
petitioners' appeal and confirmed the Co-operative Court of
Nanded's order dated 30.04.2012.
3. At the time of filing, certain office objections were raised.
Those were inadvertently overlooked by the petitioners, resulted
into the matter being listed before the Registrar (Judicial) and the
subsequent refusal of the registration.
2 93-CA-7763-26.odt
4. The applicants were unaware of this refusal. In the
interregnum, to add to the applicants plight, the erstwhile
Advocate on record representing the applicants passed away in
the year 2017. Furthermore, applicant No. 2 died in the year 2022.
Consequently, the present application has been filed seeking two
fold relief i.e. the condonation of delay and the setting aside of the
order dated 17.02.2014.
5. In view of the above peculiar facts, the Civil Application, in
the interest of justice, deserves to be allowed. Hence, the
following order:
ORDER
(i) The Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses
“B” and “C”.
(ii) The delay caused in filing the present application is
condoned.
(iii) The order dated 17.02.2014 passed by the Registrar
(Judicial) is hereby recalled.
(iv) Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 22285 of 2013 is restored to its
original position.
[SACHIN S. DESHMUKH]
JUDGE
rrd
Checking your session…