Bombay High Court
TULSHIRAM BABA JADHAV AND ORSversusBHAU SITARAM JADHAV AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The Court condoned the delay and allowed the amendment to bring the daughters on record as appellants, while also permitting photocopying of the earlier papers and removing the appeals from the daily board.
Summary
The appellants filed interim applications seeking to record the names of the heirs and legal representatives of deceased appellant No.1, specifically to add his daughters as appellant Nos. 7, 8 and 9. The respondents were served, but respondent No.5 did not appear. The Court examined whether the delay in filing these applications could be condoned and whether the amendment of parties was permissible. It held that, given the facts and circumstances, the delay was condoned and the amendment was allowed, directing that the amendment be effected within four weeks. Additionally, the Court granted leave to the appellants’ counsel to obtain photocopies of the papers filed by the earlier advocate upon payment of the requisite fees, and ordered the removal of the second appeals from the daily board.
Issues considered
- Whether the delay in filing the interim applications for amendment of parties should be condoned.
- Whether the daughters of the deceased appellant can be added as parties to the appeal at this stage.
- Whether the appellants’ counsel is entitled to photocopy the papers filed by the previous advocate.
- Whether the second appeals should be removed from the daily board.
Subjects
- amendment of parties
- condonation of delay
- interim application
- civil appellate jurisdiction
- photocopy of pleadings
- daily board removal
Judgment
25-IA-7820-2024.docx
rrpillai IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 7814 OF 2024
IN
SECOND APPEAL NO. 968 OF 2006
AND
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 7820 OF 2024
IN
SECOND APPEAL NO. 970 OF 2006
Tulshiram Baba Jadhav … Applicants/Appellants
and Others
Vs.
Bhau Sitaram Jadhav and … Respondents
Others
Mr. Piyush P. Hushing for the Applicants/Appellants
Ms. Yashashree Raut h/f. Mr. Shekhar Jagtap i/b. J Shekhar
Associates for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4.
CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J.
DATE : 12th FEBRUARY 2026
ORDER :
1. These applications are filed for for bringing on record
names of heirs and legal representative of deceased
appellant no.1. Learned counsel for the applicants submits
that the sons of the deceased appellant no. 1 are already on
record in a different capacity. By these applications he seeks
to bring on record his daughters as appellant nos. 7, 8 and 9.
Digitally signed
by
RAJESHWARI RAJESHWARI
RAMESH
RAMESH PILLAI
PILLAI Date:
2026.02.13
1/2
18:13:34 +0530
25-IA-7820-2024.docx
2. Respondents are served. Respondent nos. 1 to 4 are
represented through Advocate. Though served none appears
for respondent no. 5.
3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and for the
reasons stated in the applications, delay is condoned and the
applications are allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) and (b).
Amendment to be carried out in four weeks.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that he has
subsequently filed his appearance in the second appeals. He
therefore seeks leave to take photo copy of the papers filed
by the earlier Advocate. Leave granted to take photo copy of
the papers on payment of necessary charges as per Rules.
5. Remove the second appeals from the daily board.
[GAURI GODSE, J.]
2/2
Checking your session…