Bombay High Court
MAHADEO PANDURANG RAUTversusTHE CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court held that the interim application is made absolute and the writ petition is restored to the file.
Summary
The writ petition filed by Mahadeo Pandurang Raut was dismissed on 26 March 2026 for want of prosecution because the petitioner failed to appear. The petitioner subsequently filed Interim Application No. 7029 of 2026 seeking restoration of the dismissed petition. The Court examined the interim application, found that the applicant had demonstrated bona fides, and held that the petition could be restored to the file. An objection was raised by Respondent No.1 regarding the jurisdiction of the bench, but the Court directed the Registry to transfer the petition if necessary, without addressing the merits. Consequently, the interim application was granted and the writ petition was reinstated. No substantive merits of the original writ petition were considered in this order.
Issues considered
- Whether an interim application can restore a writ petition dismissed for want of prosecution
- Whether the bench before which the writ petition is pending has jurisdiction over the subject matter
Subjects
- interim application
- restoration of writ petition
- want of prosecution
- jurisdiction
- bench transfer
- civil appellate jurisdiction
Judgment
Digitally signed
NISHA by NISHA
SANDEEP
SANDEEP CHITNIS
CHITNIS Date:
8-IA-7029-2026.doc
2026.10.07
12:15:24 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 7029 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 1827 OF 2021
Mahadeo Pandurang Raut ...Applicant
Versus
The Central Bank of India and Ors. ...Respondents
Mr. Tanmay Vispute i/b Ms. Priyanka Thakur, for the Applicant.
Ms. Somya i/b T. N. Tripathi & Co., for the Respondent No.1.
Mr. M. M. Pable, A.G.P. for the Respondent-State.
CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE &
ASHISH S. CHAVAN, JJ.
DATE : 5th OCTOBER 2026
P.C. :
1. Interim Application No. 7029 of 2026 seeks restoration of
the writ petition, which was dismissed for want of prosecution on 26 th
March 2026, as none appeared for the petitioner.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and
perused the application, which, in our view, makes out a case for
restoring the writ petition to its file.
N. S. Chitnis 1/2
8-IA-7029-2026.doc
Considering the bona fides set out therein, the Interim
Application is made absolute in terms of its prayer clause. The writ
petition is restored to its file.
3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 1 raises an objection
that the subject matter of the writ petition does not pertain to this
Bench. In that event, upon verification, the Registry shall take
appropriate steps to place the petition before the appropriate Bench.
We make it clear that we have not touched upon the merits
of the matter and have merely restored the writ petition to its file.
ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J. BHARATI DANGRE, J.
N. S. Chitnis 2/2
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.