Bombay High Court

SHRI SONAWANE RAJENDRA LAXMANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND ORS

Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The writ petition is dismissed for default.

Summary

The petitioner filed a writ petition in 2016 challenging a matter before the High Court, but failed to appear at any of the scheduled hearings on 17 March 2024, 31 August 2026, and 9 September 2026. The learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents informed the Court that no ad‑interim relief had been granted and that the petitioner appeared to have lost interest in pursuing the case. The Court noted that the petitioner had been duly served. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition for default due to the petitioner's non‑appearance. The dismissal was recorded by both judges on the date of the order.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate consequence when a petitioner repeatedly fails to appear before the Court despite being duly served?

Subjects

default judgment
non‑appearance
writ petition
civil appellate jurisdiction
high court procedure

Judgment

                                                     6-WP-12138-2016 (C).docx


         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


             WRIT PETITION NO. 12138 OF 2016
Shri Sonawane Rajendra Laxman          … Petitioner
          V/s.
State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary
And Ors                                … Respondents
                ________________________
None for the petitioner.
Mr. R. P. Kadam, AGP for respondents-State.
               _________________________

                              CORAM       : RAJESH S. PATIL &
                                            ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.


                              DATED       : SEPTEMBER 9, 2026
P.C.:


1.      None appeared for the petitioner when the matter is called

out. Even on the earlier occasions, i.e. on 17 March 2024 and 31

August 2026, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner. The office

remark shows that the petitioner has been duly served.


2.      The learned AGP submits that the present petition was filed

in the year 2016 and that no ad-interim relief has been granted in

the present Writ Petition.


3.      It appears that the petitioner has lost interest in pursuing the


                                   1/2
adn
                                                    6-WP-12138-2016 (C).docx


matter any further.


4.    Writ Petition stands dismissed for default.




(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.)                         (RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)




                                 2/2
adn

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…