Bombay High Court
DNYANRAJ GANGARAM DIWATE and OTHERS.versusSAKHARAM RAM BANSALE.
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
Holding
The appeal is dismissed due to the appellant's absence and the 34-year delay.
Summary
The appellants filed a second appeal that remained pending for 34 years. The learned advocate for the appellants was absent and no necessary procedural steps were taken to advance the matter. The respondent was represented by Mr. Arvind Deshmukh. The court noted the inordinate delay and the failure of the appellants to appear. Consequently, the court scheduled the appeal for dismissal and ordered it dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether a second appeal pending for an extended period and without the appellant's participation can be dismissed on procedural grounds
Subjects
- appeal
- delay
- dismissal
- procedural default
- court scheduling
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:39611
sa535.92
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
9 SECOND APPEAL NO. 535 OF 1992
Dnyanraj Gangaram Diwate And Others.
VERSUS
Sakharam Ram Bansale.
...
Advocate for Respondent : Mr. Arvind Deshmukh
…..
CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
DATED : 31st AUGUST, 2026
PER COURT :-
Learned advocate for the appellants is absent. The
necessary steps, as required in the matter, are not taken. The
appeal is pending since 34 years. The appeal is scheduled for
dismissal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
(SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.)
rlj/
Checking your session…