Bombay High Court
RAJARAM MARUTI UMBARKAR SINCE DEC THR HIS LEGAL HEIRSversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS HSG. AND DEVELOPMENT DEPT AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court restored the dismissed writ petition to its file, allowing the interim application.
Summary
The petitioners, legal heirs of Rajaram Maruti Umbarkar, had filed Writ Petition No. 14455 of 2022 which was dismissed on 07 September 2026 for non‑prosecution. They filed Interim Application No. 7508 of 2026 seeking restoration of the dismissed petition. The Court examined the interim application and noted that it was filed within the prescribed limitation period. Considering the interest of justice, the Court held that the petition merits restoration to the Court's file. Consequently, the interim application was allowed, the petition was restored, and no costs were awarded.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition dismissed for non‑prosecution can be restored upon filing of an interim application within the limitation period
- Whether the interest of justice warrants restoration of the petition despite its earlier dismissal
Subjects
- writ petition
- restoration
- non‑prosecution
- interim application
- limitation period
- civil appellate jurisdiction
Judgment
904-IA-7508-26 IN WP.DOC
JYOTI
RAJESH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
MANE CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Digitally signed
by JYOTI RAJESH
MANE
Date: 2026.09.29
11:00:27 +0530
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 7508 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 14455 OF 2022
Rajaram Maruti Umbarkar Since Dec
Thr His Legal Heirs ...Applicants/Petitioners
Versus
State Of Maharashtra Thr Its Hsg. And
Development Dept And Ors ...Respondent(s)
_______
Ms. Priya Mante, for Applicants.
Mr. Arjun Yadav a/w. Mr. Rishabh Shah i/b. Ms. Ravleen Sabharwal, for
Respondent No.7.
_______
CORAM: AARTI SATHE, J.
DATE: 24 SEPTEMBER 2026
P.C.
1. By this interim application, the applicant/petitioner has prayed for
restoration of the writ petition, which came to be dismissed by the order dated 07
September 2026, for non-prosecution.
2. I have perused the averments as made in the interim application. The
present Interim Application has been preferred within the prescribed period of
limitation. However, in the interest of justice, this Court is of the opinion that the
petition deserves to be restored to the file of this Court
3. The interim application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b).
Disposed of. No costs.
4. Let copy of the Petition be served on all the parties.
Page 1 of 2
Mane
904-IA-7508-26 IN WP.DOC
5. Office objections, if any, be removed within a period of two weeks from
today.
(AARTI SATHE, J.)
Page 2 of 2
Mane
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.