Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

RAVINDRA RAJARAM WAGHversusBHAGYASHRI BHIMRAO BADADE AND OTHERS

Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The petition is dismissed in default for want of prosecution.

Summary

The petitioner, Ravindra Rajaram Wagh, filed a writ petition in 2017 before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. Over the years, the petitioner failed to appear for any hearing, including on 7 April 2026 when the court noted his absence. The court observed that the petition had been pending for several years and the petitioner appeared disinterested in prosecuting the matter. The court gave one final opportunity by placing the case under the 'For Dismissal' caption. On 10 April 2026, as the petitioner again failed to appear, the court dismissed the petition in default for want of prosecution.

Issues considered

  • Whether the writ petition should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to the petitioner's repeated non-appearance

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • dismissal
  • want of prosecution
  • default
  • high court

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:15901
                                                       1 of 1                      906-WP.10957.2017




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                         BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                    906 WRIT PETITION NO. 10957 OF 2017

                                    RAVINDRA RAJARAM WAGH
                                              VERSUS
                           BHAGYASHRI BHIMRAO BADADE AND OTHERS
                                                 ...
                Ms. Sayalee V. Nyayadhish, Advocate for the Petitioner is Absent.
                Mr. Vikram R. Dhorde, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 4.
                                                 ...

                                               CORAM :          SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
                                               DATE     :       10th APRIL, 2026
                P.C.:-

                1.            On 07.04.2026, the following order was passed:-

                         “1.    In the morning session, when the matter was called out,
                         none appears for the petitioner and, therefore, the matter was
                         kept back. In the afternoon session also, when the matter was
                         called out, nobody appears for the petitioner.

                         2.     This Petition is pending since 2017. It seems that the
                         petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter. To give one
                         more opportunity, the matter be placed under the caption ‘For
                         Dismissal’ in the urgent orders category on 10.04.2026.”

                2.            Today also none appears for the Petitioner. Hence, the

                present petition is dismissed in default for want of prosecution.



                                                         (SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.)




      Tauseef


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.