Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

Mahendra Vishanji DedhiaversusRegistrar of Companies Mumbai

Decided
Disposal
Dismissed as Withdrawn

Holding

The petition is disposed of as withdrawn, allowing the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy.

Summary

Mahendra Vishanji Dedhia filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging the actions of the Registrar of Companies, Mumbai and others. The petitioner, through counsel, expressed a desire to withdraw the writ petition and instead pursue the statutory remedy available under the Companies Act. The Court considered the request and, noting the petitioner’s instructions, ordered the petition to be disposed of as withdrawn. The Court further observed that the withdrawal would not prejudice any future statutory proceedings and that all parties’ contentions remain open for consideration in any subsequent remedy. Consequently, the writ petition was closed without adjudicating the merits.

Issues considered

  • Whether a writ petition may be withdrawn by the petitioner in favour of pursuing a statutory remedy

Subjects

  • withdrawal of writ petition
  • statutory remedy
  • civil procedure
  • high court

Judgment

                                                                                           (911)-WP-4038-26.odt

       PANCHAL

                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
          Digitally
          signed by
          BALAJI
BALAJI    GOVINDRAO
GOVINDRAO PANCHAL
PANCHAL   Date:
                                           WRIT PETITION NO. 4038 OF 2026
          2026.09.03
          11:06:05
          +0530


                       Mahendra Vishanji Dedhia                            ...Petitioner
                             Versus
                       Registrar of Companies, Mumbai & Ors.               ...Respondents
                                                             ...
                       Mr. Ranit Basu a/w Ms. Harshada Nirmal, Ms. Sakshi Telavane, Ms. Aditi
                       Sirasat & Ms. Anisha Pandey i/by Bridgehead Law Partners, for the
                       Petitioner.
                       Ms. Manisha Jagtap, for Respondent No.1.
                       Mr. Ramiz Shaikh a/w Ms. Aradhya Sharma i/by Mr. Ramiz Shaikh, for
                       Respondent No.4.
                                                             ...

                                                CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, ACJ. &
                                                        GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.

                                                  DATE : 2nd SEPTEMBER, 2026.


                       P.C.:
                       1.           This matter was heard for some time.




                       2.           Considering the statutory remedy available, the learned

                       Advocate for the Petitioner, on instructions, submits that the Petitioner

                       desires to withdraw this Writ Petition and avail the statutory remedy.




                       3.           In view of the above, this Petition is disposed off as withdrawn,

                       on instructions.


                                                              1
                                                           (911)-WP-4038-26.odt




4.          In the event, the Petitioner avails the statutory remedy, all

contentions of all the parties are kept open and the withdrawal of this

Petition would not be an impediment.




 [GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.]                     [ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE]




                                       2


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.