Bombay High Court
POORVA KRISHNANATH KULKARNIversusSaleel Krishnakant Kulkarni
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
- Bench
- ARIF S DOCTOR
Holding
The Court restored the dismissed testamentary suit, holding that sufficient cause and the interest of justice warranted its reinstatement.
Summary
The plaintiff, Poorva Krishnanath Kulkarni, filed an interim application seeking restoration of a testamentary suit (Suit No. 97 of 2013) that had been dismissed on 20 January 2026 because no party was present. The application was filed by counsel Ms. Gargi Bhagwat on behalf of the plaintiff. The Court examined the uncontroverted averments in the interim application and found that sufficient cause existed to restore the suit. The judge held that the substantive interest of justice would be best served by reinstating the suit to the Court's file. Consequently, the interim application was allowed and the suit was restored, with further directions to be given on 21 July 2026.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate procedural remedy when a testamentary suit is dismissed due to the absence of parties?
- Whether the Court can restore a dismissed suit on the basis of sufficient cause and the interest of justice.
Subjects
- testamentary suit
- interim application
- suit restoration
- procedural law
- interest of justice
Judgment
1/2 51-IA-2203-2026 (OS).DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2203 OF 2026
IN
TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO. 97 OF 2013
Poorva Krishnanath Kulkarni ...Applicant/Plaintiff
Versus
Saleel Krishnakant Kulkarni ...Defendant
_______
Ms. Gargi Bhagwat i/b M/s. Divekar Bhagwat & Co., for the Applicant/Plaintiff.
_______
CORAM : ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.
DATE : 7th JULY, 2026
P.C.
1. The present Interim Application seeks restoration of the captioned
Testamentary Suit, which came to be dismissed pursuant to an order dated 20 th
January 2026 which reflects that, on that date, none remained present on behalf
of either of the parties. A copy of the Interim Application is served on learned
counsel for the Defendant.
2. Having heard Ms. Bhagwat, learned counsel for the Applicant/Plaintiff
and having perused the averments made in the Interim Application, which have
drawn uncontroverted, I am satisfied that sufficient cause has been made out.
Further, in my view, the substantive interest of justice would best be served if the
application is allowed and the suit is restored to the file of this Court.
3. The Interim Application is accordingly allowed and disposed of in terms of
prayer clauses (a) and (b).
Vaibhav
2/2 51-IA-2203-2026 (OS).DOC
4. Stand over to 21st July 2026 for direction.
[ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.]
Vaibhav
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.