Bombay High Court
MS CHARULATA SURYKANT VEDAK AND ORSversusMRS. MEGHANA NISHIT MURDESHWAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- GAURI GODSE
Holding
The Court held that although the delay may be condoned, the grounds presented are not maintainable in a review petition, leading to its rejection.
Summary
The petitioners filed an interim application seeking condonation of delay in filing a review petition against an order dated 7 February 2025 that dismissed their appeal challenging an interim injunction. The review petition was filed by the original defendants who wanted the order granting the injunction to be reconsidered. The Court observed that the grounds raised in the review petition were essentially the same as those that could be raised in an appeal and therefore could not be entertained in a review proceeding. While the Court found sufficient cause to condone the delay, it held that the review petition could not proceed on the merits. Consequently, the interim application for condonation was allowed, but the review petition was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether the delay in filing the review petition can be condoned.
- Whether the grounds raised in the review petition are maintainable in a review proceeding.
Subjects
- review petition
- condonation of delay
- interim injunction
- civil appellate jurisdiction
- procedural law
Judgment
29-RPAST-37048-2025.docx
rrpillai IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION 38403 OF 2025
IN
REVIEW PETITION (ST) NO. 37048 OF 2025
IN
APPEAL FROM ORDER No. 5 OF 2025
Ms. Charulata Surykant Vedak … Applicant/Petitioner
and Others
Vs.
Mrs. Meghana Nishit Murdeshwar … Respondent
Mr. Ashish Dubey a/w. Ms. Yogita Kanojiya for the
Applicants/Petitioners.
CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J.
DATE : 12th FEBRUARY 2026
ORDER :
1. This application is for condonation of delay in filing
review petition. The review petition is filed by the appellants
i.e. original defendant nos. 1 to 3 seeking review of order
dated 7th February 2025 dismissing the appeal from order.
The appeal was filed to challenge the order granting interim
injunction restraining the defendants from creating third party
rights in respect of the suit property. The grounds argued in
the review petition are in the nature of the grounds of
Digitally signed
by
RAJESHWARI RAJESHWARI
RAMESH
RAMESH PILLAI
PILLAI Date:
2026.02.13
1/2
18:13:33 +0530
29-RPAST-37048-2025.docx
challenge in the appeal to challenge the order under review.
The said grounds cannot be entertained in the review
petition.
2. In the facts and circumstances of the case, delay is
condoned and the interim application is allowed.
3. For the reasons recorded above, review petition is
rejected.
[GAURI GODSE, J.]
2/2
Checking your session…