Bombay High Court
MANHARLAL KALIDASversusN DEVELOPERS AND CO AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- RAJESH S PATIL
Holding
The court allowed the interim application, permitting the filing of a vakalatnama on behalf of the HUF respondent.
Summary
The respondent No.1, a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF), filed an interim application seeking leave to file a vakalatnama on behalf of the HUF. The applicant's counsel argued that the original plaintiff had been served by pasting a notice on the door and that the plaintiff's lawyer had also been served, with no appearance or opposition from the plaintiff. The court noted the absence of any reply or objection to the interim application. Considering the applicant's representation through Mr. Rajendra Manharlal Sayani, the court found no impediment to granting the relief. Consequently, the interim application was allowed, permitting the filing of the vakalatnama as prayed for. The registry was directed to act on the authenticated copy of the order.
Issues considered
- Whether the HUF respondent may be represented by a vakalatnama filed by a member of the HUF
- Whether service of notice by pasting on the door suffices for procedural compliance in the interim application
Subjects
- interim application
- vakalatnama
- HUF
- service of notice
- civil procedure
Judgment
2026:BHC-AS:10583
Diksha Rane 37 IA 10466 2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
37 IA/10466/2025
In
WP/11281/2012
MANHARLAL KALIDAS
VS
N DEVELOPERS AND CO AND ORS
------------
Adv. Laxmi Jenkins a/w. Adv. Sayali Shinde i/b. VIGIL JURIS for
applicant.
None for respondent.
------------
CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.
DATE : 4 MARCH 2026.
P.C. :
1) This interim application has been filed on behalf of the
respondent no.1 seeking leave to file vakalatnama of the applicant on
behalf of the respondent – HUF.
2) Ms. Jenkins, learned counsel appearing for the applicant
submits that the original plaintiff has been served by pasting the
Notice on the door, so also, the lawyer of the original plaintiff has
been served.
3) None appears for the original plaintiff neither any reply has
been filed opposing the interim application.
1
Diksha Rane 37 IA 10466 2025.doc
4) It is the case of the applicant that the applicant being a HUF
has been represented through Mr. Rajendra Manharlal Sayani, hence,
permission is sought to allow the applicant – Mr. Rajendra Manharlal
Sayani to file vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent –
Mr.Manharlal Kalidas Sayani – HUF.
5) After hearing learned counsel for the applicant and after going
through the contents of the interim application, I am convinced that
present interim application needs to be allowed.
6) Interim Application stands allowed in terms of prayer clause
9(i).
7) Registry to act on the basis of the authenticated copy of this
order.
(Rajesh S. Patil, J.)
2
Signed by: Diksha Rane
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 04/03/2026 20:50:54
Checking your session…