Bombay High Court
SHRI. AJIT MAHADEO PRABHU JHATEversusMR. ABUBAKR SHAIKH SINCE DECEASED THR MRS. JULIE ALIAS JAKIRA DENIAL SHIRGAONKAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The court condoned the delay, allowed the interim application, and dismissed the review petition, rejecting the late submission of new evidence.
Summary
The petitioner, Shri Ajit Mahadeo Prabhu Jhate, filed an interim application seeking condonation of delay in a review petition concerning a civil suit. The court, after hearing the petitioner's counsel, condoned the delay and allowed the interim application. The petitioner later attempted to introduce documents indicating that the suit property was acquired in 1972, but the court held that such evidence was untimely and should have been presented during the trial. Both the trial court and the appellate court had previously ruled against the petitioner on this issue, leaving no ground for interference. Consequently, the review petition was dismissed and the interim application was disposed of.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate standard for condoning delay in filing an interim application?
- Whether newly discovered documents relating to the acquisition of the suit property can be admitted at the stage of a review petition.
- Whether there exists any ground to interfere with the earlier judgments of the lower courts.
Subjects
- interim application
- delay condonation
- review petition
- new evidence
- civil procedure
- possession
- court discretion
Judgment
Gitalaxmi 23-IA-7541-2026.docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 7541 OF 2026
IN
REVIEW PETITION (STAMP) NO. 26958 OF 2026
IN
CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 602 OF 2025
SHRI. AJIT MAHADEO PRABHU JHATE ...APPLICANT
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN :
SHRI. AJIT MAHADEO PRABHU JHATE ...PETITIONER
Versus
MR. ABUBAKAR SHAIKH SINCE DECEASED
THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS
Mr. Prathamesh K. Deshpande a/w Ms. Mrunmayee Kashyap,
learned counsel for the Applicant/Petitioner.
None for the Respondents.
CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.
DATE : 5th OCTOBER, 2026.
Per Court :
1. None present for the Respondents.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the
Applicant/Petitioner.
Page 1 of 2
5th OCTOBER, 2026
Gitalaxmi 23-IA-7541-2026.docx
3. For the reasons stated in the Interim Application, the delay
is condoned.
4. Interim Application No. 7541 of 2026 stands allowed and
disposed of accordingly.
5. Learned counsel for the Applicant/Petitioner submits that
the Applicant/Petitioner is now come in possession of certain
documents, which would indicate that the suit property was acquired
in the year 1972. However, it is too late to accept the same on
record. The acquisition proceedings are part of public record and the
same ought to have been filed during the course of trial.
6. Both the Courts have concurrently held against the
Applicant/Petitioner on this aspect. As such, no ground is made out
to interfere with the matter.
7. In view of the above, Review Petition (Stamp) No. 26958 of
2026 stands disposed of accordingly.
[ ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. ]
Digitally signed
by GITALAXMI
GITALAXMI KRISHNA
KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR
KOTAWADEKAR Date:
2026.10.08
11:22:56 +0530
Page 2 of 2
5th OCTOBER, 2026
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.