Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

SHIVAM STONE CRUSHER THROUGH PROPRIETOR RAJABHAU SHANTALING WADKARversusVIKAS VASUDEO YADAV

Disposal
APPLICATION ALLOWED

Holding

The revision application is allowed as infructuous, and the trial and appellate court orders are quashed.

Summary

The applicant, Shivam Stone Crusher Proprietor Rajabhau Shantling Wadkar, filed a criminal revision application against Vikas Vasudeo Yadav. The parties settled their dispute through a mediator, who submitted a report confirming the settlement. The applicant’s counsel argued that the settlement rendered the revision application infructuous. The court accepted this submission, held that the application was no longer maintainable, and therefore allowed the revision application. Consequently, the court quashed and set aside the orders of both the trial court and the appellate court, and disposed of the matter.

Issues considered

  • Whether a settlement between parties before a mediator renders a pending criminal revision application infructuous
  • Whether the trial and appellate court orders should be quashed in view of the settlement

Subjects

  • settlement
  • mediation
  • criminal revision
  • quash
  • infructuous
  • court orders

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:38703




                                                     -1-

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                       942 CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 74 OF 2026

                   SHIVAM STONE CRUSHER THROUGH PROPRIETOR RAJABHAU
                                   SHANTALING WADKAR
                                         VERSUS
                                  VIKAS VASUDEO YADAV

              Mr.D.A.Mane h/f Mr.N.G.Talekar, Advocate for the Applicant.
              Mr.S.W.Khan h/f Mr.Pankaj Bharat, Advocate for the sole respondent.

                                      ( CORAM : SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J. )

                                         DATE : 27th AUGUST, 2026

              PER COURT :


              1.                The learned Advocate for the Applicant at the outset states
              that the parties have settled their dispute before the learned Mediator
              and the learned Mediator has also submitted his report before this
              Court.


              2.                Since the dispute between the parties has been settled, the
              instant Revision Application has become infructuous. Hence the
              Revision Application stands allowed and disposed of.


              3.                In that view of the matter, the impugned orders passed by
              the Trial Court as well as the Appellate Court are quashed and set aside.



                                                        ( SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J.)

              khs/Aug.2026/74


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.