Bombay High Court

SHAILESH D. SANVORDEKAR AND ANRversusGOVT. OF GOA, THR. ITS CHIEF SECRETARY AND ANR

Disposal: Allowed

Holding

The court allowed the deletion of the deceased respondent’s name from the cause title.

Summary

The applicants, son and daughter‑in‑law of the deceased Respondent No. 2, sought the deletion of the deceased’s name from the cause title of a civil suit concerning property allotted to them under a compromise dated 28‑07‑2016 and recorded in inventory proceedings. The suit (Civil Suit No. 9/2017) had a judgment and decree dated 12‑09‑2020, against which an application (FA/18/2023) was filed. The applicants argued that, since the property had already been allotted to them, the other heirs of the deceased need not be impleaded and that the application was filed within the limitation period. The Registrar, after considering the submissions, allowed the Miscellaneous Civil Application, ordering the deletion of Respondent No. 2’s name and permitting consequential amendments. The order effectively amended the cause title to reflect the death of the respondent.

Issues considered

Whether the name of a deceased party may be deleted from the cause title of an ongoing suit.
Whether the other heirs of the deceased need to be impleaded after the deletion of the deceased’s name.

Subjects

property dispute
deletion of party name
cause title amendment
limitation period
succession
compromise deed

Judgment

                                  MCA 100 of 2026



             FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET
        IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
                   APPELLATE SIDE
            MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.100 OF 2026
                             IN
                 FIRST APPEAL NO.18 OF 2023
SHAILESH D. SANVORDEKAR AND ANR                         ... APPLICANTS

VS

GOVT. OF GOA, THR. ITS CHIEF
SECRETARY AND ANR                                       ... RESPONDENTS


Advocate present for the Applicant : Advocate Virendra Parshekar,
holding for Advocate Shalaka Shelke

                          REGISTRAR'S ORDER


This matter is placed on Board for Orders. The said MCA was filed for

deletion of name of Respondent No. 2.



Advocate Virendra Parsekar is present for the Applicants, holding for

Advocate Shalaka Shelke. He submits that the Applicants are the son and

daughter-in-law of deceased Respondent No. 2. The dispute arises from a

suit concerning property which was alloted to the Applicants under

compromise terms dated 28.07.2016, which were recorded in Inventory

Proceedings No. 40/2010. Thereafter FA/18/2023 was filed against the

Judgment and Decree dated 12.09.2020 passed in the said Civil Suit No.

9/2017 by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Quepem.




                                        Page 1 of 2
                                    20th August, 2026
                                    MCA 100 of 2026


The Applicants have prayed that the name of Respondent No. 2 shall be

deleted from the cause title on account of his death. Applicants further

pray that since the property is already allotted to them, the other heirs of

Respondent No. 2 i.e. his daughter and son in law as mentioned in

paragraph 2 of the Application, need not be brought on record as their

presence is not necessary for the proceedings.



Advocate Virendra Parsekar submits that the said Application has been

filed within the period of limitation and hence be allowed.



                      ORDER

'In view of submissions made by the Applicants and their Advocate, Mr.

Virendra Parsekar, MCA/100/2026 is allowed. The name of Respondent

No. 2 shall be deleted from the cause title of the proceedings. All the

consequential amendments may be carried out within stipulated time.'




Dated: 20th August, 2026                                   ( Irshad Agha )
                                                          (Registrar Judicial)
ADN*




                                        Page 2 of 2
                                      20th August, 2026

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…