Bombay High Court
BHARAT VISHNU SONAWALEversusUNION OF INDIA THR. INITIATION OFFICER OFFICE OF DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ORS.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court held that the dismissal for default may be set aside and the appeal restored in the interest of justice.
Summary
Bharat Vishnu Sonawale filed First Appeal No. 1638 of 2024 which was dismissed on 3 April 2025 for non‑prosecution because his counsel failed to appear, citing inadvertence. He moved an interim application (No. 38307 of 2025) seeking restoration of the appeal, arguing that the default was accidental and that a related appeal (No. 1635 of 2024) on the same subject remains pending, so no prejudice would be caused. Respondents objected to the restoration. The Court, after considering both sides, held that in the interest of justice the dismissal could be set aside, condoned the 190‑day delay, and ordered the appeal and its connected interim application to be restored and heard together with the pending appeal. The interim application was therefore disposed of in favour of the applicant.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate remedy when an appeal is dismissed for non‑prosecution due to inadvertent default?
- Can a dismissal for default be set aside after a substantial delay of 190 days?
- Does restoration of the appeal cause prejudice to the respondents?
Subjects
- restoration of appeal
- default dismissal
- interim application
- procedural law
- civil appellate jurisdiction
- interest of justice
Judgment
Ingale 34-ia-38307-25.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally
URMILA
signed by
URMILA
PRAMOD
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PRAMOD INGALE
INGALE Date:
2026.09.02
10:32:53
+0530
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 38307 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1638 OF 2024
Bharat Vishnu Sonawale … Applicant
In the matter between
Bharat Vishnu Sonawale ..Appellant
Versus
Union of India and ors. .… Respondents
****
Mr. P. K. Dhakephalkar, Senior Advocate (through VC) i/b
Mr.Jaydeep Deo, for the Applicant.
Mr. Aayush Kedia, for Respondents No. 1 to 3-UOI.
****
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL &
RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, JJ.
DATE : 31st AUGUST, 2026
P.C. :
1. This is an application for restoration of the First Appeal
No. 1638 of 2024 along with Interim Application No. 13479 of
2024. Learned Senior Counsel for the Applicant invited our
attention to the order dated 3rd April 2025 by which these
proceedings stood dismissed for non-prosecution. It is mentioned
1
Ingale 34-ia-38307-25.odt
in the Application and it is submitted before us that when the
matter was listed on 3rd April 2025, the Advocate appearing for the
Applicant was unaware of the listing of the matter as he had
completely relied on the appointed Advocate. It was through sheer
inadvertence that the matter remained unattended and hence was
dismissed for default. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that
regarding the same subject matter, another First Appeal No. 1635
of 2024 is still pending before the Court and therefore no prejudice
would be caused to the Respondents if the First Appeal No. 1638
of 2024 is restored.
2. Learned Counsel for the Respondents No. 1, 2 and 3
submitted that he has objection for restoration of the Appeal.
3. We have considered both the submissions. In the interest
of justice, we are inclined to allow this Interim Application. The
matter remained unattended through inadvertence. The
connected Appeal is already pending. Hence, the following order.
4. The delay of 190 days in filing the Interim Application for
restoration of the First Appeal is condoned.
5. The First Appeal No. 1638 of 2024 and connected Interim
2
Ingale 34-ia-38307-25.odt
Application No. 13479 of 2024 are restored to file. They shall be
tagged and heard with First Appeal No. 1635 of 2024.
6. The Interim Application is disposed of.
(RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
3
Checking your session…