Bombay High Court

MR. SHIRKE CHANDRAKANT AND OTHERSversusMR. LIYAKAT HUSSAIN KHAN AND OTHERS

Decided: 29 August 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The Court dismissed the interim application for want of prosecution due to the appellant's non‑appearance.

Summary

The appellants, Mr. Shirke Chandrakant and others, filed an interim application before the Bombay High Court. No counsel appeared on their behalf, indicating that the appellants had lost interest in prosecuting the petition. Respondents (Nos. 1 to 4) were represented by Adv. Harsha Y. Shah and Adv. Yatin R. Shah. The Court observed the appellant's non‑appearance and, under the principle that a proceeding cannot continue without prosecution, dismissed the interim application for want of prosecution. No substantive merits of the dispute were considered, and the matter was closed at the interim stage.

Issues considered

Whether an interim application may be dismissed for want of prosecution when the appellant fails to appear before the Court

Subjects

interim application
want of prosecution
high court
civil appellate jurisdiction
non‑appearance

Judgment

                                                                          22 6304-26.DOC



              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                   INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 6304 OF 2026
                                   IN
                  APPEAL FROM ORDER ST. NO. 29904 OF 2025


Mr. Shirke Chandrakant and others                                Appellants

         Versus

Mr. Liyakat Hussain Khan and others.                             Respondents

                                       _______
None for the Appellant.
Adv. HarshaY. Shah with Adv. Yatin R. Shah, for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4.
                                       _______

                      CORAM:                 AARTI SATHE, J.

                       DATE:                 29th AUGUST 2026

P.C.

1.       Adv. Harsha Shah appears on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

2.       None appears for the Appellant. It seems that the Appellant has lost interest

in prosecuting the present petition. Dismissed for want of prosecution.




                                             (AARTI SATHE, J.)




                                    Page 1 of 1
Tiwari

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…