Bombay High Court
SAMEER DNYANESHWAR BANKHELEversusAbhyudaya Co op Bank Ltd
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court held that sufficient cause was shown for the delay, and therefore the interim application for restoration was allowed.
Summary
The applicant filed an interim application seeking restoration of Commercial Arbitration Petition No. 14274 of 2023, which had been dismissed on 26 August 2024 for failure to remove office objections. The petition was originally instituted on 25 May 2023, and the interim application was filed 645 days later, a delay the applicant attributed to the status shown on the court’s website and the previous counsel’s non‑compliance. The respondent opposed the application. The Court examined whether the delay could be condoned and whether the petition could be restored despite outstanding objections. Finding that sufficient cause was shown for the delay and the non‑removal of objections, the Court allowed the interim application, directing compliance with any office objections within four weeks and ordering the petition to be placed for admission. The interim application was consequently disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether a delay of 645 days in filing an application for restoration of a dismissed arbitration petition can be condoned.
- Whether the Court can restore the petition despite the applicant’s failure to remove office objections.
Subjects
- Arbitration
- Restoration of petition
- Office objections
- Delay condonation
- High Court of Bombay
Judgment
Digitally
signed by 15-IA-3881-26.DOC
MEERA
MEERA MAHESH
MAHESH JADHAV
JADHAV Date:
2026.08.28
17:48:19
+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3881 OF 2026
IN
COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PETITION (L) NO. 14274 OF 2023
Sameer Dnyaneshwar Bankhele ...Applicant
Vs.
Abhyudaya Co-op Bank Ltd ...Respondent
----------
Ms Lavanya Panicker i/b Mr. Sahil Sayyed for Applicant.
Ms Deepika Paswan (through VC) for Respondent.
-----------
CORAM: AARTI A. SATHE, J.
DATED: 27th AUGUST, 2026
P.C.
1. The present interim application has been filed for restoration of the
Commercial Arbitration Petition (l) No.14274 of 2023.
2. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the aforesaid petition
was instituted on 25th May 2023 and came to be dismissed on 26 th August
2024 for non removal of office objections. It is her contention that even on
the date of filing the interim application, the status of the present
arbitration proceeding was shown as pending on this Court’s website. It is,
therefore, her submission that, in view of the status reflected on the website
of this Court, coupled with the fact that the earlier Advocate had failed to
comply with the office objections, there has been a delay of 645 days in
filing the present application for restoration and for removal of the office
objections.
Page 1 of 2
Meera Jadhav
15-IA-3881-26.DOC
3. Learned Counsel for the Respondent has opposed this application.
However, considering the averments made in the present application, this
Court is of the view that a sufficient cause has been made out for the delay
in filing this interim application and also for non removal of office
objections. The interim application deserves to be allowed in terms of
prayer clauses (a) to (c). Office objections, if any, to be complied with
within a period of four weeks from today. The Petition shall thereafter be
placed for admission.
4. Interim application accordingly stands disposed off.
(AARTI A. SATHE, J.)
Page 2 of 2
Meera Jadhav
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.