Bombay High Court

KAJAL HEMANT VISPUTE AND ANOTHERversusHEMANT SUDHAKAR VISPUTE

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: SIDDHESHWAR SUNDARRAO THOMBRE

Holding

The petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Summary

The petitioners, Kajal Hemant Vispute and another, filed writ petition No. 14641 of 2017 in the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking relief against the respondent Hemant Sudhakar Vispute. The petition was listed for hearing on 18 April 2026, but no counsel or party appeared on behalf of the petitioners. The court noted that the petitioners had shown no interest in prosecuting the matter since its inception in 2017. The sole issue before the court was whether the petition could proceed despite the petitioners' non‑appearance. The bench held that a petition cannot be entertained without prosecution and therefore dismissed it for want of prosecution. The dismissal was entered as a final order.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate course of action when petitioners fail to appear and prosecute a writ petition?

Subjects

writ petition
non‑appearance
want of prosecution
dismissal
high court

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:17265
                                                 1 of 1                      942-WP.14641.2017




                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                               942 WRIT PETITION NO. 14641 OF 2017

                               KAJAL HEMANT VISPUTE AND ANOTHER
                                                VERSUS
                                    HEMANT SUDHAKAR VISPUTE
                                                   ...
                Mr. Girish Nagori, Advocate for the Petitioners is Absent.
                Mr. Arivind K. Tiwari, Advocate for Respondent.
                                                   ...

                                         CORAM :          SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
                                         DATE     :       18th APRIL, 2026
                P.C.:-

                1.        None appears for the Petitioners. Even in the morning

                session, when the matter was called out, none appeared on their

                behalf. The matter pertains to the year 2017. It appears that the

                Petitioners are not interested in prosecuting the matter.


                2.        Hence, the present petition is dismissed for want of

                prosecution.

                                                   (SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.)

      Tauseef

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…