Bombay High Court

PARASMAL DHULCHAND BHANDARI and OTHERS.versusGULAB FAIZUMIYA and OTHERS.

Disposal: DISMISSED

Holding

The appeal is dismissed for default.

Summary

The appellants were ordered to amend their pleadings on 16 January 2026 but failed to do so. When the matter was called, no representative appeared for the appellants. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the second appeal on the ground of default. No substantive merits of the case were considered. The dismissal was solely procedural due to non‑compliance with the court's order and absence of counsel.

Issues considered

Whether the appeal can proceed when the appellants fail to comply with the amendment order and are absent from the hearing

Subjects

default
procedural non‑compliance
amendment order
appeal dismissal
high court procedure

Judgment

                                              1                            916 sa.584.92.odt


                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                           BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
                        916 SECOND APPEAL NO. 584 OF 1992

                  PARASMAL DHULCHAND BHANDARI AND OTHERS
                                  VERSUS
                        GULAB FAIZUMIYA AND OTHERS
                                     ...


                                       CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
                                       DATE       :   18th August, 2026.

      P.C.:

      1       The learned counsel for the appellants has not carried out

      amendment as per order dated 16th January, 2026.


      2       None present for the appellants when the matter is called out.


      3       The appeal is dismissed for default.



                                              [ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ]
nga

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…