Bombay High Court
LAXMAN KANHU KOLHEversusTHAKSEN SITARAM KOLHE AND ORS.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution.
Summary
The petitioner, Laxman Kanhu Kolhe, filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court. During proceedings, the petitioner's counsel informed the court that he had no instructions to continue prosecuting the petition. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition for want of prosecution. The judgment noted that the petitioner could apply for restoration of the petition if he later wishes to pursue it. No substantive merits of the petition were considered.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate procedural consequence when a petitioner's counsel indicates lack of instructions to prosecute a writ petition?
Subjects
- writ petition
- dismissal
- want of prosecution
- restoration
- civil appellate jurisdiction
Judgment
2026:BHC-AS:34298
Megha 18_wp_4993_2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.4993 OF 2018
Laxman Kanhu Kolhe ...Petitioner
V/s.
Thaksen Sitaram Kolhe and Ors. ...Respondents
________________
Mr. Aditya Mhaske i/b. Mr. Vijay Dighe for the Petitioner.
Mr. Ganesh Bhujbal for Respondent Nos.2 to 6,11 and 12.
________________
CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
DATED: 18 AUGUST 2026.
P.C.:
1) The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, on
instructions, submits that he has no instructions to prosecute the
Petition.
2) Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed for want of prosecution. In
the event, the Petitioner is interested in prosecuting the Petition, he
would be at liberty to apply for restoration of the same.
[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]
Signed by: Megha S. Parab
Page No.1 of 1
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge 18 August 2026
Date: 20/08/2026 11:25:06
Checking your session…