Bombay High Court

MAHAMADALI A. VAHAB SHAIKHversusMARIUAM MAHAMADALI SHAIKH

Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The Family Court Appeal is dismissed for non‑prosecution.

Summary

The applicant, Mahamadali A. Vahab Shaikh, filed a Family Court Appeal but subsequently lost contact with his counsel, resulting in no instructions being available. The applicant's counsel sought condonation of delay, while the respondent's counsel highlighted two illegitimate children and a maintenance order of Rs.10,000 per month with arrears of Rs.5,00,000. The applicant failed to appear when the matter was called, and his advocate indicated a desire to be discharged from the case. The Court observed that the applicant had lost interest in pursuing the appeal and therefore dismissed the Family Court Appeal for non‑prosecution. All interim applications were also disposed of.

Issues considered

Whether the Family Court Appeal should be dismissed for non‑prosecution due to the applicant's failure to appear and lack of instructions
Whether condonation of delay in filing the appeal is permissible under the circumstances

Subjects

Family Law
Maintenance
Non‑prosecution
Dismissal
Condonation of Delay
Legal Representation Discharge

Judgment

2026:BHC-KOL:7655-DB
6.IA.1727.2023.odt

IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1727 OF 2023
IN
FAMILY COURT APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 31970 OF 2022

Mahamadali A. Vahab Shaikh ...Applicant

Versus

Mariuam Mahamadali Shaikh ...Respondent
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (STAMP) NO. 31972 OF 2022
IN
FAMILY COURT APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 31970 OF 2022
***
 Mr. Balaji P. Shinde i/b Ms. Kavita P. Shinde, Advocate for the
Applicant.
 Ms. Seema Dighe (Through V.C.) i/b Adv. Sarda, Advocate for the
Respondent.
***
CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL AND
ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.
DATE : 17 AUGUST, 2026.
P. C. :

1. On 11 August 2026, the following order was passed in the

present proceeding :

“1. Mr. Balaji Shinde, learned counsel appearing for the
appellant submits that after filing of this Family Court
Appeal, his client is not in touch with him. Therefore,
he does not have any instructions in the present Family
Court Appeal. He submits that there is a delay in filing
this appeal hence, an application for condonation of

Shrikant Malani Page 1 of 2
6.IA.1727.2023.odt

delay has been filed.

2. Ms. Seema Dighe, learned counsel appearing for the
respondent – wife submits that there are two sons born
out of the wedlock of the applicant with the respondent
and both the sons are in her custody. There was an
order of maintenance Rs. 10,000/- per month and as
of today, there are arrears of Rs. 5,00,000/-

3. Stand over to 17 August 2026 matter to come up under
the caption for “Dismissal”.”

2. Mr. Balaji Shinde, learned counsel, submits that the

Advocate-on-Record has already communicated to the Applicant that

the Advocate-on-Record is seeking discharge from the present

proceeding.

3. None appears for the Applicant when the matter is called

out. Neither is the Applicant present in person. It appears that the

Applicant has lost interest in pursuing the matter any further.

4. The Family Court Appeal stands dismissed for non-

prosecution.

5. In sequel, all interim applications stand disposed of.

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)

Shrikant Malani Page 2 of 2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…