Bombay High Court

M/S VISHAL ENTERPRISES THROU. ITS PROP SHRIRANG LANDEPATILversusTHE PRESIDING OFFICER CGIT CENTRAL GOVT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL 2 AND ORS

Decided: 2 April 2026
Disposal: Rejected
Bench: AMIT BORKAR

Holding

The Court refused to grant any further extension of time.

Summary

M/s Vishal Enterprises applied for a further extension of time to deposit 10% of the assessed amount, a pre‑condition for obtaining a stay. The High Court had previously extended the deadline to 30 April 2025 and subsequently to 30 June 2025. The present application seeks another extension, citing the sale of immovable property as the reason for delay. The Court observed that the applicant is an operating industry and that the reason offered does not justify further postponement. Considering the overall facts, the Court was not inclined to grant any more time. Consequently, the interim application was rejected.

Issues considered

Whether the Court should grant a further extension of time for the applicant to deposit the 10% pre‑condition amount

Subjects

extension of time
pre‑condition deposit
stay of proceedings
interim application
civil procedure
High Court

Judgment

                                                25-ia-1651-2026-in-wp2026-2025.doc

MPBalekar

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                 INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1651 OF 2026
                                  IN
                    WRIT PETITION NO. 2026 OF 2025

M/s. Vishal Enterprises                          … Applicant
            V/s.
The Presiding Officer and Ors.                   … Respondents

Mr. Vivek V. Salunke for the applicant.
Ms. Nidhi Chauhan             i/by   M.N. Rajput for         the
respondents.
                                CORAM      : AMIT BORKAR, J.

                                DATED      : APRIL 2, 2026
P.C.:

1.          The applicant is seeking for extension of time to deposit 10
percent of assessed amount as pre-condition for grant of stay.
Initially, by order dated 18 February 2025, this Court extended the
period to deposit 10 % of amount till 30 April 2025. By order
dated 7 May 2025, the period was extended till 30 June. The
application is now filed seeking further extension.

2.          The reason assigned in paragraph Nos. 7 & 8 of the
application is in respect of sale of immovable property. However, it
is not in dispute that applicant is an industry which is working
condition. Therefore, on consideration of overall facts, I am not
inclined to further extend the period. The interim application,
therefore, stands rejected.

                                                 (AMIT BORKAR, J.)




                                      1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…