Bombay High Court
BABAN BALNNA GAWALIversusGANPATI SAMBHAJI POAL
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution.
Summary
The petitioner, Baban Balanna Gawali, filed a writ petition but failed to appear in court on the scheduled date, and his counsel was also absent. The respondent, Ganpat Sambhaji Poal, was represented by Advocate S.V. Dixit. The court noted the absence of the petitioner’s counsel on 21/9/2026 and, despite being called, no representative for the petitioner appeared. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition for want of prosecution. The dismissal was ordered by Justice Sachin S. Deshmukh of the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate course of action when a petitioner fails to appear and prosecute a writ petition?
Subjects
- writ petition
- dismissal
- want of prosecution
- court procedure
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:44708
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.280 OF 2000
Baban Balanna Gawali … PETITIONER
VERSUS
Ganpat Sambhaji Poal … RESPONDENT
.......
Mr. S.V. Dixit, Advocate for respondent
....…
CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : 28th SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :
Recording absence of the counsel for the petitioner on
21/9/2026, this matter was kept today for dismissal. In spite of the same,
none present for the petitioner when the matter is called out. As such the
Writ Petition stands dismissed for want of prosecution.
(SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.)
fmp/-
Checking your session…