Bombay High Court

ADELINA DA SACRADA FAMILIA CARVALHO E FERNANDES SINCE DECEASED THR HER LRS AND ANRversusSEBASTIANA FERNANDES ALIAS MASLIN SINCE DECEASED AND 26 ORS

Disposal: Disposed of

Holding

The application for extension of time is rejected as the presiding officer has not sought any extension, and such directions are at the court's discretion.

Summary

The applicant, Adelina da Sacrada Familia Carvalho e Fernandes (deceased), filed an application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC on 29 August 2026 seeking an extension of time to comply with a direction dated 24 April 2026 for the trial court to dispose of an appeal. The application was filed on the same day the appellate court had listed the matter for judgment. The High Court examined whether a party may seek an extension of time when the presiding officer has not itself requested such an extension. The Court held that the application was impermissible because the direction to the trial court is not subject to a party's request for time unless the presiding officer seeks it. Consequently, the application was rejected and disposed of. The decision underscores that extensions of time under Order 41 Rule 27 are at the discretion of the court, not a right of the parties.

Issues considered

Whether a party may file an application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC for an extension of time when the presiding officer has not requested such an extension.

Legislation cited

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. Order 41 Rule 27

Subjects

extension of time
Civil Procedure Code
Order 41 Rule 27
High Court
application disposal
court discretion

Judgment

2026:BHC-GOA:1782
                                            904 MCA 523 2026

                Sonam

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
                          MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.523 OF 2026
                                           IN
                            APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.17 OF 2026
           ADELINA DA SACRADA FAMILIA
           CARVALHO E FERNANDES SINCE
           DECEASED THR HER LRS AND ANR                            ... APPLICANT
              Versus
           SEBASTIANA FERNANDES ALIAS MASLIN
           SINCE DECEASED AND 26 ORS                               ... RESPONDENT


           Mr. Byron Rodrigues (through V.C.), Advocate for the
           Applicant.

           Mr. Sudesh Usgaonkar, Senior Advocate with Ms. Rosette
           Pereira, Advocate for the Applicant.


                                 CORAM:- VALMIKI MENEZES, J.
                                 DATED :- 3rd September, 2026

           P.C.:


           1.    Registry to waive office objections and register the matter.


           2.       It appears that after this Court disposed of the Appeal from
           Order No. 17/2026 by its Judgment dated 24.04.2026, the
           Appellate Court i.e., the Court of District Judge-2, Margao, dealing
           with Regular Civil Appeal No. 49/2019, has heard the Appeal and
           has listed the same for Judgment on 29.08.2026. During that
           period, the present Applicant/Appellant has filed the application


                                                Page 1 of 2
                                             3rd September, 2026
                                904 MCA 523 2026


under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC on the very date the matter was
posted for Judgment, i.e. on 29.08.2026. It is in these
circumstances that the Appellant in that Appeal, who is the
Appellant herein, has moved this application for extension of time
stated in the order dated 24.04.2026 directing the Trial Court to
dispose of the Appeal.


3.    In my opinion, the parties cannot apply for the extension of
time since, essentially, it is a direction to the Court/ Presiding
Officer. In the present case, the Presiding Officer has not asked for
any extension of time, and it is to be understood from that, the
Presiding Officer would deal with the matter in accordance with
law and dispose of the matter within the time frame as specified in
the order dated 24.04.2026. In this view of the matter, the
application stands rejected.


4.   The application stands disposed of.



                                            VALMIKI MENEZES, J.




                                    Page 2 of 2
                                 3rd September, 2026

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…