Bombay High Court

SMT. DAMINI MAHENDRA PATALE (PATEL) AND ORS. NO. 1 FOR HERSELF AND NATURAL GUARDIAN OF 2 TO 5versusTHE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, MAHARASHTRA STATE ROAD THRANSPORT CORPORATION

Decided: 2 February 2026
Disposal: Dismissed
Bench: R M JOSHI

Holding

The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution due to the appellants' failure to appear.

Summary

The appellants, Smt. Damini Mahendra Patale and others, filed an appeal before the Bombay High Court against the Divisional Controller, Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Nashik. No counsel appeared for the appellants on the scheduled hearing date. The court observed that the appellants showed no interest in prosecuting the appeal. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. The judgment was delivered by Justice R. M. Joshi on 2 February 2026.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate consequence when an appellant fails to appear for a scheduled hearing, indicating lack of interest in prosecuting the appeal?

Subjects

appeal
want of prosecution
dismissal
civil procedure
non-appearance

Judgment

                                                                               76 FA 181-23-C.DOC




                                                                                      Priya Soparkar


                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                                        FIRST APPEAL NO.181 OF 2023

                      Smt. Damini Mahendra Patale (Patel) and ors. …Appellants
                            Versus
                      The Divisional Controller, Maharashtra State …Respondents
                      Road Transport Corporation, Nashik.


                      None for the Appellants.
                      None for the Respondents.


                                           CORAM:           R. M. JOSHI, J.
                                           DATED:           2nd FEBRUARY, 2026.
                      PC:-


                      1.     None for the Appellants.

                      2.     Record indicates that on the next date of hearing, no one
                      was present for the Appellants.

                      3.     This shows that the Appellants have no interest in
                      prosecuting the appeal.

                      4.     Hence, appeal stands dismissed for want of prosecution.



                                                                              (R. M. JOSHI, J.)
                                                                                                   {




PRIYA
RAJESH
SOPARKAR
Digitally signed by
PRIYA RAJESH
SOPARKAR
Date: 2026.02.04
11:49:16 +0530


                                                       Page 1 of 1
                                                  nd
                                                2 February, 2026.

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…