Bombay High Court
Kailash Parmeshwar TarateversusThe Union of India, Through the General Manager, Central Railway,
- Disposal
- Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Holding
The Court condoned the delay and allowed the amendment of the appeal to include the legal heirs, granting the relief sought in the civil application.
Summary
The applicant, Kailash Parmeshwar Tarate, who was also Respondent No.1 and a claimant in a first appeal filed by the Union of India, died during the pendency of that appeal. The Union of India failed to amend the appeal to include his legal heirs, leading the High Court to dismiss the appeal on 18‑04‑2026. Consequently, the original claimants were entitled to withdraw an amount deposited by the acquiring body, but the heirs could not do so because they were not on record. The applicant filed a civil application, albeit 264 days late, seeking condonation of the delay and permission to amend the appeal to bring in the legal heirs. The Court condoned the delay, allowed the amendment within two weeks, and disposed of the civil application in favour of the applicant.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can condone a delay of 264 days in filing a civil application seeking amendment of an appeal.
- Whether the Court can permit amendment of an appeal to include the legal heirs of a deceased party after the appeal has been dismissed.
Subjects
- condonation of delay
- amendment of appeal
- legal heirs
- withdrawal of deposited amount
- civil application
- procedural law
- succession
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:39970
1 936.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9505 OF 2026
IN FA/821/2026
KAILASH PARMESHWAR TARATE
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH THE GENERAL MANAGER,
CENTRAL RAILWAY,
...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Shinde Chandrakant Kondiram
AGP for Respondent No. 3 : Ms. Vaishali Chaudhari
…
CORAM : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.
DATE : 28th AUGUST, 2026
PER COURT :
1. The Application is filed for bringing LRs of Applicant no. 1
in the Application, who is Respondent no. 1 and Claimant in the First
Appeal filed by the Union of India.
2. It is submitted that Respondent no. 1 has expired during the
pendency of Appeal itself. However, the necessary amendment was not
carried out by the Appellant Union of India. As a result of which, while
deciding the First Appeal the names of legal heirs of Applicant no. 1
remained to be taken in the Appeal and the Appeal has been dismissed by
this Court vide order dated 18.04.2026.
3. As a result of dismissal of the Appeal, the original claimants
2 936.odt
are entitled for withdrawal of amount deposited by the acquiring body.
Since the legal heirs of Applicant no. 1 were not brought on record, the
legal heirs are facing difficulty in withdrawing the amount which is
deposited by the acquiring body. There is a delay of 264 days in filing
this Application.
4. For the reasons stated in the Application, the delay is
condoned.
5. In view of the averments made in the Application, Civil
application is allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘A-1’, ‘B’ and ‘B-1’.
6. The Applicants are permitted to carry out the necessary
amendment in the Appeal within a period of two weeks.
7. Civil Application stands disposed of.
( MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. )
SPC
Checking your session…