Bombay High Court

VIJAY KUNDAN AND ANRversusINSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA

Decided: 4 March 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: SUMAN SHYAM SHYAM C CHANDAK

Holding

The court condoned the delay and restored the writ petition to the file.

Summary

The petitioners sought condonation of a 400‑day delay in filing an interim application to restore their civil writ petition, which had been refused because they failed to remove office objections within the prescribed two‑week period. The Registrar had ordered automatic refusal if objections were not removed, which the petitioners did not comply with. The petitioners argued that server migration caused the delay and that they now stand ready to remove the objections, asserting a strong meritorious case and potential irreparable loss if the petition remained barred. The court found no prejudice to the respondents and noted that the petitioners had not obtained any undue advantage from the delay. Consequently, the court allowed the interim application, condoned the delay, restored the writ petition to the file, and directed the petitioners to remove the office objections within three weeks.

Issues considered

Whether a delay of 400 days in filing an application for restoration of a writ petition can be condoned?
Whether the writ petition can be restored despite the petitioners' failure to remove office objections within the stipulated time?

Subjects

condonation of delay
restoration of writ petition
office objections
interim application
civil appellate jurisdiction
irreparable loss

Judgment

                                                      04 IA1185.2026.DOC




P.H. Jayani


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                  INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1185 OF 2026
                                   IN
               CIVIL WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO. 14025 OF 2024


Vijaya Kunden and anr.                                    … Applicants/
                                                             Petitioners
       Versus
Institute of Chartered Accountants of                     …Respondents
India, New Delhi and anr.


Mr. Vihit Shah i/b. Mr. Ruturaj H. Gurjar for the Applicants/
Petitioners.


                         CORAM:        SUMAN SHYAM &
                                       SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ.
                         DATED:        04th MARCH, 2026
PC:-

1.        By this Application, the Applicants pray for an order

condoning the delay of 400 days in filing the present Application

to restore the Writ Petition (St.) No. 14025 of 2024 to the file, the

restoration of which was refused on account of non-removal of

office objections within the stipulated time.


2.        Heard Mr. Vihit Shah, learned Advocate for the Applicants.




                                  Page 1 of 3
                                                    04 IA1185.2026.DOC




3.    In the conditional Order dated 9th September, 2024, the

Registrar (Judicial-I) noted that, despite the said Petition was

sufficiently notified for removal of the office objections, the

learned Advocate for the Petitioners failed to remove the office

objections. Therefore, the learned Registrar was constrained to

direct that if the office objections were not removed within period

of two weeks, the registration of the Petition would stand refused

automatically without further reference to the Registrar. However,

the Petitioners had failed to comply this direction. In consequence

thereof, the said refusal got confirmed.


4.    Mr. Shah, learned Advocate for the Applicants/Petitioners,

submitted that the Applicants have a strong case on merits. He

further submitted that due to migration of servers, the Applicants

were unable to remove the office objections online within the

stipulated time. However now, the Applicants are ready to remove

the office objections at the earliest. He contended that if the delay

is not condoned and the Petition is not restored to the file, the

Applicants would suffer irreparable loss. Hence, he has submitted

that the present Application be considered favourably.




                              Page 2 of 3
                                                                         04 IA1185.2026.DOC




                      5.    The Petitioners have not derived any undue advantage on

                      account of the said delay. If the delay is condoned, no prejudice

                      would be caused to the other side.


                      6.    In view thereof the reasons stated above, we are inclined to

                      allow the Application. Hence, the following Order :-

                                  (a)     Interim Application No.1185 of 2026 is allowed.

                                  (b)     The delay of 400 days in filing the present

                                  Application is condoned and the Petition is restored to

                                  file.

                                  (c) The aforesaid Petition stands restored to the file

                                  with immediate effect.

                                  (d)     The learned Advocate for the Petitioners is

                                  directed to remove the office objections within three

                                  weeks from the date of uploading of this Order.

                      7.    Interim Application is disposed of in aforesaid terms.




                      (SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.)                        (SUMAN SHYAM, J.)
                                                                                            {




  PREETI
  HEERO
  JAYANI
Digitally signed by
PREETI HEERO
JAYANI
Date: 2026.03.12
14:16:21 +0530


                                                    Page 3 of 3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…